Born fallen?

[sammydee]

Yes but quite a lot of people never end up believing in God. This is what I am saying. Do these people get sent with a one way ticket to hell? If they are going to go to hell, then why doesn't God just show himself to them and then they will believe him and then they'll get to heaven?

You STILL haven't given me a proper answer to this!

Sam

 

[dvd_holc]

Sorry I don't understand. What exactly are you saying here?

As a human, you cannot escape being in community with other humans, the enviroment, and God because you were created in all of them. Likewise, because you were born into community you inherit the effects of those who came before you. Even if you try to remove yourself from the human community you still have impact in the environment which has a ripple throughout the lake. Further, you have an awareness of good/evil and justice/injustice that transcends complete knowledge. This awareness is specifically instinctual to being human and continues to expanded until it is made complete. So then, you ask of Divine judgment...God judges all according to that persons faithfulness to either goodness and justice or evil and injustice.

 

[MethodMan]

Erm that doesn't really answer my question. I don't think God has ever revealed himself to me. At least, I don't remember ever seeing or talking to him. If you never heard of God or even saw a bible how would you know that Jesus had given his life for you?

Did you read Romans 1?

 

[aiki]

Does it say anywhere in the Bible that God has a different method of judging these people? Or is that your opinion? What do other people think?

God doesn't have a different method of judging those who know little of Him, but a different standard.

"The lord of that servant will come in a day when he looks not for him, and at an hour when he is not aware...

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.

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." - Luke 12:46-48

So if somebody never had access to the bible they would automatically be granted access to heaven have I got that right?

No, I don't think so. Certainly, the above parable spoken by Christ doesn't suggest this. When a person realizes that there is a God -- and nearly every person at some point does -- they become accountable for what they do with that knowledge. If that knowledge is not used as motivation to seek after the God evident in Creation, then that person has made an evil choice and one for which God will judge them.

If God truly wants to save me, why doesn't he show me that he exists?

He has shown you He exists; He has shown us all:

Rom 1:19 - 22 "Because that which may be known of God is manifest in them; for God has showed it unto them.

For the invisible things of him from the creation of the world are clearly seen, being understood by the things that are made, even his eternal power and Godhead; so that they are without excuse:

Because that, when they knew God, they glorified him not as God, neither were thankful; but became vain in their imaginations, and their foolish heart was darkened.

Professing themselves to be wise, they became fools..."

Peace to you.

 

[WarEagle]

I am an atheist but I'm genuinely interested in how religious people justify their faith. Here's a question I'd like to hear the answer to:

I think it's safe to assume that somewhere in the world a person will be born who lives and dies never even hearing of christianity and Jesus. It says in the bible that anyone who does not accept Jesus as their saviour is doomed to burn in hell for all eternity.

I see a paradox here. If God is all loving he would never let an innocent like this be punished far far out of proportion to their crime (indeed, what crime?!?). However, one of the main premises of Christianity is that anybody who does not believe in Jesus is doomed to burn in hell for all eternity.

How do christians explain this paradox?

I see three fundamental flaws in your premise.

The first is that the Bible never says anything about “accepting Jesus Christ as your Lord and Savior”. In fact, it says just the opposite. It tells us that it is up to Jesus to accept us.

What does “believe in Jesus” mean, anyway? What good does that do?

Doesn’t even the Devil believe in Jesus and tremble at His name?

I believe in President Bush but if I went to the gates of the White House and demanded that I have a right to see him because I “believe in him”, they wouldn’t let me in. They’d lock me away in a rubber room because my belief is useless if President Bush doesn’t know me.

There are a lot of people who “believe” in Jesus, but Jesus doesn’t know them. They just stand at the gates and demand to be let in while God laughs.

The second flaw is that you’re assuming that the person in your premise is sinless. Tell me, how did this person manage to go his whole life without sinning? And how does this square with Jesus’ words in Matthew 19:17 that tell us that no one is innocent? Or Romans 3:23 and 5:12, both of which tell us that all have sinned?

The third flaw is the assumption that Hell is not proportionate to the sin.

Let’s say for a moment that I’m a person prone to tell lies.

I tell a lie to my daughter.

I tell a lie to my wife.

I tell a lie to my boss.

I tell a lie to the government (say, perjury in a courtroom).

It’s the same lie but the consequences are going to be far different in each case.

I tell a lie to my daughter and nothing happens.

I tell a lie to my wife and I have to sleep on the couch for a couple of days.

I tell a lie to my boss and I lose my job.

I tell a lie to the government and I go to jail.

Do you see how the consequences keep getting worse even though the offense is the same? Why is this?

It’s because the consequence goes up in proportion to the authority of the one I have sinned against. In the same way, Hell is not so drastic and so terrible because the offense is any worse, but because the authority and character of God is so great that when we sin against Him, we deserve punishment proportionate to the authority of the one we’ve offended.

I would also add that MethodMan is right. God has provided evidence for His existence and a way for those who’ve never heard the Gospel to be saved.

Paul, in his letter to the Romans, tells us that God has given every man two witnesses: the witness of creation, by which we can know that there is a God (see also Acts 14:17), and the witness of the conscience, so that we may know that we’ve broken the Creator’s laws.

I don't think God has ever revealed himself to me. At least, I don't remember ever seeing or talking to him. If you never heard of God or even saw a bible how would you know that Jesus had given his life for you?

Sure He has. He’s revealed Himself to you by the witness of Creation. He’s revealed Himself to you by the witness of His word. He’s revealed Himself to you in the person of Jesus Christ.

If we didn’t have a Bible or hadn’t heard the Gospel, then we would have no way of knowing that Jesus Christ gave His life for us. But the good news is that we are not saved by proposition or by our theological knowledge, but by the grace and mercy of God.

Remember that passage of scripture MethodMan told you about (Romans 1). Don’t forget how it tells us about the two witnesses and how God made provisions for those who never heard the Gospel to be saved.

What about somebody who never hears about God? What happens to them?

God judges them based on how they respond to those two witnesses (creation and conscience) we talked about. Remember that the Bible tells us that God sees the heart of man and sees how he responds to the light he has been shown. If he does choose to respond, then God continues to give him more light to the extent that he responds to the light he’s already received.

Ok so what about this. If God truly wanted everybody to believe in him, then why doesn't he prove his existence to me?

If I were to see some convincing evidence for God - for example, a miraculous event that was repeatable and scientifically tesatable, yet could not be explained by any current scientific theory and was clearly in violation of known laws of physics, I would seriously consider the christian God as a theory to explain that event.

If God truly wants to save me, why doesn't he show me that he exists?

In Luke 16, Jesus tells us the story of a rich man who dies and goes to Hell. 0nce in Hell, he realizes that he’s failed to keep God’s law and failed to serve God and now is paying the price for his sin.

All of a sudden, he thinks about his brothers and realizes that they’re headed for the same terrible fate.

Hoping to warn them, he begs Father Abraham, “Father Abraham, I beg of you! Please release Lazarus (who had also died) and send him to my father’s house to warn my brothers so that they won’t be thrown into Hell!”

Abraham’s response is one that applies very much to your situation.

Abraham tells the rich man, “Your brothers have the law of Moses and the prophets. If they won’t listen to them, then they will not be pursueded by a man come back from the dead”.

In the same way, Sammy, God has given you His word and has written His law on your heart. If you’re not going to listen to them, then you’re not going to be persuaded by miracles.

Besides, without the objective standard of scripture, you’d have no way to determine that a miracle was from God in the first place.

Yes but quite a lot of people never end up believing in God. This is what I am saying. Do these people get sent with a one way ticket to hell? If they are going to go to hell, then why doesn't God just show himself to them and then they will believe him and then they'll get to heaven?

Like I said, believing in Jesus doesn't get anyone into Heaven. You're assuming that anyone who believes the words of Jesus of even believes in Jesus will choose to repent of their sins and that's just not true. Jesus explains in John 3 that the natural inclination of men is to choose darkness (sin) over the light (Jesus) because they know that their sins are evil and they want to keep them covered up, rather than exposing them to the standard of God's holiness.

I've shared the Gospel with people and had them tell me to my face that they know what I'm saying is true, but that they don't want to stop doing the sin they're involved in.

My own brother told me that he knew he was going to Hell unlss he repented and got right with God, but that he just loved his lifestyle too much to quit.

 

[calidog]

Yes but quite a lot of people never end up believing in God. This is what I am saying. Do these people get sent with a one way ticket to hell? If they are going to go to hell, then why doesn't God just show himself to them and then they will believe him and then they'll get to heaven?

You STILL haven't given me a proper answer to this!

Sam

He could do that but He has determined that though we can't see Him we believe He is. This is His way. He is sovereign, He is God, He knows what is best for us.

Heb 11:6 But without faith it is impossible to please him: for he that cometh to God must believe that he is, and that he is a rewarder of them that diligently seek him.

(note that He is a rewarder of them that seek Him)

You or I may think that if He would show Himself to us then all would be well. But He disagrees with that. Who is right, Him or us?

 

[sammydee]

I see three fundamental flaws in your premise.

The first is that the Bible never says anything about “accepting Jesus Christ as your Lord and Savior”. In fact, it says just the opposite. It tells us that it is up to Jesus to accept us.

What does “believe in Jesus” mean, anyway? What good does that do?

I thought that was the whole point of christianity! To believe in, and accept Jesus Christ as your saviour. Have I got that wrong somewhere?

There are a lot of people who “believe” in Jesus, but Jesus doesn’t know them. They just stand at the gates and demand to be let in while God laughs.

Laughing at people destined to suffer for billions and billions of years does not sound like the act of a loving, benevolent entity to me.

The second flaw is that you’re assuming that the person in your premise is sinless. Tell me, how did this person manage to go his whole life without sinning? And how does this square with Jesus’ words in Matthew 19:17 that tell us that no one is innocent? Or Romans 3:23 and 5:12, both of which tell us that all have sinned?

See the problem I see is that, given human nature, it is completely impossible to live a life without sin. Not only would it be incredibly dull and uninteresting, it would also be very impractical (now work on the Sabbath for example) and also physically quite impossible.

For example, according to the old testament in Exodus 35:2, if you see someone working onthe Sabbath they should be put to death. Of course, if you kill them you are in violation of the ten commandments. The bible is very self-contradictory and you are a sinner no matter what you do.

The third flaw is the assumption that Hell is not proportionate to the sin.

Let’s say for a moment that I’m a person prone to tell lies.

I tell a lie to my daughter.

I tell a lie to my wife.

I tell a lie to my boss.

I tell a lie to the government (say, perjury in a courtroom).

It’s the same lie but the consequences are going to be far different in each case.

I tell a lie to my daughter and nothing happens.

I tell a lie to my wife and I have to sleep on the couch for a couple of days.

I tell a lie to my boss and I lose my job.

I tell a lie to the government and I go to jail.

Do you see how the consequences keep getting worse even though the offense is the same? Why is this?

It’s because the consequence goes up in proportion to the authority of the one I have sinned against. In the same way, Hell is not so drastic and so terrible because the offense is any worse, but because the authority and character of God is so great that when we sin against Him, we deserve punishment proportionate to the authority of the one we’ve offended.

Now I have never heard this before. I thought the idea was "accept Jesus as your saviour and dwell in heaven forever and be surrounded by milk, honey and hundreds of virgins" or "renounce Jesus and go to hell where you wil burn in ultimate pain as punishement for your sins forever."

I never knew there was a graded punishment thing going, where God only sends you to hell for a little bit then reckons you've had enough of singed flesh and torture and whips you out and puts you in heaven. Is this a commonly held view or is it just your interpretation?

I would also add that MethodMan is right. God has provided evidence for His existence and a way for those who’ve never heard the Gospel to be saved.

How are peopel who have never heard of the gospel supposed to know about Jesus, and that he died for us? What if they attribute creation to a different God entirely (an understandable mistake wouldn't you say?). It says quite clearly in Exodus 20:2-17 that it is a sin to have any other Gods instead of the one true God.

Paul, in his letter to the Romans, tells us that God has given every man two witnesses: the witness of creation, by which we can know that there is a God (see also Acts 14:17), and the witness of the conscience, so that we may know that we’ve broken the Creator’s laws.

Well the way I see it there is no need for God to explain the creation of the universe, science does a much better job, and it is far more useful. A lot of people share my views on this matter, it is a rational view that any logical person could reach. Are we all going to hell just for using our 'God-given' reason to figure out this stuff?

Sure He has. He’s revealed Himself to you by the witness of Creation. He’s revealed Himself to you by the witness of His word. He’s revealed Himself to you in the person of Jesus Christ.

Firstly I don't even think there's sufficient evidence that Jesus ever existed. Secondly, even if he has existed that certainly doesn't make the leap of believing him to be the son of god. "Witness of his word"? What word? I have never experienced God talking to me. And how does the existence of the universe REQUIRE that there be a creator? I don't believe this at all, as a matter of fact I think it's highly unlikely. It is one thing for a hot ball of matter at the big bang to spring into existence, but to assume that an infinitely more complex creator could have sprung into existence beforehand? That's just not logical.

If we didn’t have a Bible or hadn’t heard the Gospel, then we would have no way of knowing that Jesus Christ gave His life for us. But the good news is that we are not saved by proposition or by our theological knowledge, but by the grace and mercy of God.

Is that true? So does God extend this grace and mercy to everybody or just christians?

Remember that passage of scripture MethodMan told you about (Romans 1). Don’t forget how it tells us about the two witnesses and how God made provisions for those who never heard the Gospel to be saved.

God judges them based on how they respond to those two witnesses (creation and conscience) we talked about.

Well a lot of people around the world don't find those two things to be evidence enough. Both can be explained much better by scientific examination, and then a god hyothesis isn't needed.

Remember that the Bible tells us that God sees the heart of man and sees how he responds to the light he has been shown. If he does choose to respond, then God continues to give him more light to the extent that he responds to the light he’s already received.

So let me get this straight - you have to make a blind leap of faith, against reason and evidence before God will prove his existence to you? Right... that doesn't sound right at all. Why should you have to have belief with no evidence before you are given evidence? Why can't God give us evidence now?

In Luke 16, Jesus tells us the story of a rich man who dies and goes to Hell. 0nce in Hell, he realizes that he’s failed to keep God’s law and failed to serve God and now is paying the price for his sin.

All of a sudden, he thinks about his brothers and realizes that they’re headed for the same terrible fate.

Hoping to warn them, he begs Father Abraham, “Father Abraham, I beg of you! Please release Lazarus (who had also died) and send him to my father’s house to warn my brothers so that they won’t be thrown into Hell!”

Abraham’s response is one that applies very much to your situation.

Abraham tells the rich man, “Your brothers have the law of Moses and the prophets. If they won’t listen to them, then they will not be pursueded by a man come back from the dead”.

In the same way, Sammy, God has given you His word and has written His law on your heart. If you’re not going to listen to them, then you’re not going to be persuaded by miracles.

I listen to the bible, and I listen to me conscience, and I also listen to my rational, logical mind. And rational thinking tells me that one book, no matter how widely read, is not enough to extrapolate an entire belief system and morals, and a creator which clearly has no place in a scientific analysis of the world. It also seems to me to be the case that, if the bible agrees with our conscience in its laws, then the people that wrote the laws in the bible also had a conscience so it is not surprising that the bible echoes ours! Besides, a conscience makes perfect evolutionary sense.

But anyway, I definately would be pretty far persuaded by repeatable, scientifically provablke miracles. As a scientist I have to keep an open mind. This means that if new evidence appears I have to analyse it and see if the current theories take it into account. If new, RELIABLE evidence comes into existence that requires a theory of God I would take it very seriously indeed.

However, because the existence of God is so unlikely, it would have to be pretty extraordinary evidence to convince me of this extraordinary claim. Hearsay like "my friend's cousin's brother got healed at this miracle fountain!" or whatever doesn't cut it I'm afraid.

Besides, without the objective standard of scripture, you’d have no way to determine that a miracle was from God in the first place.

Exactly my point. However, if the miracle involved, for example, Jesus materializing in front of me and telling me that it was all true after all, then going through some rigourous scientific tests and found to be capable of doing these miracles repeatably and reliably, I would think seriously about taking his word for it. Let's be honest here, god is all powerful you say - if He is all powerful then He is more than capable of convincing me of His existence if He so chooses.

Like I said, believing in Jesus doesn't get anyone into Heaven. You're assuming that anyone who believes the words of Jesus of even believes in Jesus will choose to repent of their sins and that's just not true. Jesus explains in John 3 that the natural inclination of men is to choose darkness (sin) over the light (Jesus) because they know that their sins are evil and they want to keep them covered up, rather than exposing them to the standard of God's holiness.

I've shared the Gospel with people and had them tell me to my face that they know what I'm saying is true, but that they don't want to stop doing the sin they're involved

My own brother told me that he knew he was going to Hell unlss he repented and got right with God, but that he just loved his lifestyle too much to quit.

Well that isn't my problem at all. My problem is that I don't see sufficient evidence for the existence of God at all. My question still remains unsatisfactorily answered:

If there is somebody who (completely understandably) lives in sin, and never accepts Jesus as their saviour because either they don't see enough evidence for it, or they never heard of the gospels, will they go to hell forever? Is it the act of a loving and omnipotent God to condemn his people to suffering like this? If we are all guilty of breaking His laws, why doesn't he change the law so we are all innocent? Seems to me like any set of laws that makes every single person guilty must be flawed.

Sam

 

[WarEagle]

I thought that was the whole point of christianity! To believe in, and accept Jesus Christ as your saviour. Have I got that wrong somewhere?

Yes. That is wrong. The Bible never tells us to accept Jesus. In fact, it tells us just the opposite: that it is up to Jesus to accept us or not.

As for simply "believing in Jesus", what does that mean?

Doesn’t even the Devil believe in Jesus and tremble at His name?

I believe in President Bush but if I went to the gates of the White House and demanded that I have a right to see him because I “believe in him”, they wouldn’t let me in. They’d lock me away in a rubber room because my belief is useless if President Bush doesn’t know me.

There are a lot of people who “believe” in Jesus, but Jesus doesn’t know them. They just stand at the gates and demand to be let in while God laughs.

Just making a mental acknowledgement doesn't save us. It is repentance and faith in Christ's atoning work on our behalf that saves.

See the problem I see is that, given human nature, it is completely impossible to live a life without sin.

Exactly. That's why we need a way to be forgiven and reconciled to God.

For example, according to the old testament in Exodus 35:2, if you see someone working onthe Sabbath they should be put to death. Of course, if you kill them you are in violation of the ten commandments. The bible is very self-contradictory and you are a sinner no matter what you do.

No, if someone were carrying out capital punishment, he would not be guilty of sin.

Now I have never heard this before. I thought the idea was "accept Jesus as your saviour and dwell in heaven forever and be surrounded by milk, honey and hundreds of virgins"

No, that's Islam.

I never knew there was a graded punishment thing going, where God only sends you to hell for a little bit then reckons you've had enough of singed flesh and torture and whips you out and puts you in heaven. Is this a commonly held view or is it just your interpretation?

It certainly isn't my interpretation. The Bible is very clear that Hell is eternal and those who go to Hell are there for eternity.

How are peopel who have never heard of the gospel supposed to know about Jesus, and that he died for us?

If they've never heard the Gospel, then they've never heard the Gospel. However, we've already explained to you the provisions God has made for those who've never heard the Gospel to be saved.

What if they attribute creation to a different God entirely (an understandable mistake wouldn't you say?). It says quite clearly in Exodus 20:2-17 that it is a sin to have any other Gods instead of the one true God.

No, Ex 20:2-17 tells the Israelites that it is a sin for them to knowingly reject God in order to worship false gods. It says nothing about those who misunderstand the nature of God.

Well the way I see it there is no need for God to explain the creation of the universe, science does a much better job, and it is far more useful.

Was science right when it said that the Earth is flat? Was science right when it said that the Universe is geocentric? Was science right when it said that diseases were caused by evil spirits?

If science is capabl of explaining the Universe at all, then the first thing any rational scientist will admit is that a design requires a designer.

Are we all going to hell just for using our 'God-given' reason to figure out this stuff?

No. People go to Hell for transgressing God's law, not for using reason.

Firstly I don't even think there's sufficient evidence that Jesus ever existed.

Do you believe that Alexander the Great existed?

And how does the existence of the universe REQUIRE that there be a creator? I don't believe this at all, as a matter of fact I think it's highly unlikely.

You're sitting at a computer right now. Where did it come from?

Do you believe that the materials just formed a computer over the course of millions of years? 0r did someone have to design and build it?

It is one thing for a hot ball of matter at the big bang to spring into existence, but to assume that an infinitely more complex creator could have sprung into existence beforehand? That's just not logical.

Again, there are two flaws with this argument.

The first is, if you're going to make the "hot ball of matter" argument, then you've got to explain where the matter came from.

The second is that you're judging the nature of God by the same standard you judge matter. God is not matter, God is spirit.

Is that true? So does God extend this grace and mercy to everybody or just christians?

The Bible tells us that God will show grace to those who humble themselves before Him.

Well a lot of people around the world don't find those two things to be evidence enough. Both can be explained much better by scientific examination, and then a god hyothesis isn't needed.

But creation cannot be explained without a creator. Design cannot be explained without a designer.

So let me get this straight - you have to make a blind leap of faith, against reason and evidence before God will prove his existence to you? Right... that doesn't sound right at all. Why should you have to have belief with no evidence before you are given evidence? Why can't God give us evidence now?

Again, God has given us evidence.

I listen to the bible, and I listen to me conscience, and I also listen to my rational, logical mind. And rational thinking tells me that one book, no matter how widely read, is not enough to extrapolate an entire belief system and morals, and a creator which clearly has no place in a scientific analysis of the world.

A scientific analysis must start with the assumption that a design requires a designer.

It also seems to me to be the case that, if the bible agrees with our conscience in its laws, then the people that wrote the laws in the bible also had a conscience so it is not surprising that the bible echoes ours!

It isn't that the law agrees with out conscience, it is that our conscience tells us when we have broken the law.

Besides, a conscience makes perfect evolutionary sense.

No it doesn't. It makes terrible evolutionary sense. Evolution is based on "survival of the fittest". That is, to advance your own survival and well being by the exploitation of the weak.

If that's the case, then the last thing we would want would be a voice that tells us that it's wrong to kill, to steal, to lie, etc.

In an evolutionary context, those things would all be desirable, not sinful.

In an evolutionary context, the last thing we would want to do would be to show compassion for the hungry and the sick.

We would have to cheer genocide and the death and exploitation of the weak and suffering.

But anyway, I definately would be pretty far persuaded by repeatable, scientifically provablke miracles.

And how would you know that these miracles are proof of God?

Exactly my point. However, if the miracle involved, for example, Jesus materializing in front of me and telling me that it was all true after all

And Jesus, Himself, already addressed this in the passage I already cited for you.

then going through some rigourous scientific tests and found to be capable of doing these miracles repeatably and reliably, I would think seriously about taking his word for it. Let's be honest here, god is all powerful you say - if He is all powerful then He is more than capable of convincing me of His existence if He so chooses.

God has given you evidence for His existence.

If there is somebody who (completely understandably) lives in sin, and never accepts Jesus as their saviour because either they don't see enough evidence for it, or they never heard of the gospels, will they go to hell forever?

Again, as we've been trying to explain to you, God has made provisions for those who've never heard the Gospel to be saved. If they reject that, then they are rejecting the only available avenue of salvation.

Is it the act of a loving and omnipotent God to condemn his people to suffering like this?

I don't see any evidence in the Bible that God condemns any of "His people". The question is, are those who go to Hell "His people"? The Bible says no.

If we are all guilty of breaking His laws, why doesn't he change the law so we are all innocent? Seems to me like any set of laws that makes every single person guilty must be flawed.

Because God is holy and righteous and just, it is up to us to meet the standard of His holiness, not to Him to lower His standard to our sinfulness.

 

[Criada]

Sammydee,
God is a God of judgement, but He is also a God of love!
Sometimes it's hard for us to reconcile these two, because we are not God.
But He certainly does not condemn people for not having heard of Him.
Everyone has a chance to accept Him - how that happens is up to Him.
The important thing for you is, having heard, what will you do?

 

[James1979]

WarEagle,

Some of your statements I agree with but this statement that you wrote:

"I would also add that MethodMan is right. God has provided evidence for His existence and a way for those who’ve never heard the Gospel to be saved.
"

There is no where in scripture that says that God has another means to save people without hearing the gospel. That's an impossibility. That's been God's methodology since beginning with Adam up until this current time in our existence.

How do you explain John the Baptist becoming saved in his Mother's womb. His mother and father were in the word vey deeply. Remember in Romans 10:17:

So then faith cometh by hearing, and hearing by the word of God.

You simply cannot believe (saving faith) on Jesus Christ without the gospel, it has never been done before in our human existence.

James

 

[hlaltimus]

Hi All.

I am an atheist but I'm genuinely interested in how religious people justify their faith. Here's a question I'd like to hear the answer to:

I think it's safe to assume that somewhere in the world a person will be born who lives and dies never even hearing of christianity and Jesus. It says in the bible that anyone who does not accept Jesus as their saviour is doomed to burn in hell for all eternity.

I see a paradox here. If God is all loving he would never let an innocent like this be punished far far out of proportion to their crime (indeed, what crime?!?). However, one of the main premises of Christianity is that anybody who does not believe in Jesus is doomed to burn in hell for all eternity.

How do christians explain this paradox?

Sam

Remember: In the Bible God has not told us all of what He could reveal, but all of what He would reveal. In the Bible the Lord has intentionally left out a vast amount of unrevealed truth that is not any of our business right now while in this world and many of those hidden truths should be left just that...Hidden. Some unrevealed truths can be deduced from applying general Biblical principles such as the salvation of all infants. I haven't the slightest doubt that all infants and children in all un-Christianized lands are without exception escorted into heaven upon their deaths, but where is this clearly taught in the Scriptures? A person, limiting himself strictly to only what the Bible has clearly revealed, might easily come up with a teaching that those children who haven't heard the gospel are doomed and he would be wrong in that conclusion. God knows what He is doing in the apparent harshness of the Scriptures...He is deliberately moving us toward keeping on the safe side for our own good. I have often wondered the same thought myself, "Will the morally righteous but un-Christianized tribes perish?" When we finally do get to that awful and final day of judgment there will without doubt be many surprises awaiting us then and there that we could have never forseen while in this life of limited knowledge, but it will always stand as a safe rule that in salvation it is better to be over-cautious than under-cautious and that is also the way in which the Bible has been written.

 

[sammydee]

Ok I think I understand - but you can see why I am confused?

So you take the bible as more of a guide than literally. Interesting... how do you know which bits to accept and which are just metaphors or allegory?

I mean, what if Jesus and the ressurection was meant as a metaphor for something and eveyrbody just got it wrong in their interpretation?

Sam

 

[hlaltimus]

Ok I think I understand - but you can see why I am confused?

So you take the bible as more of a guide than literally. Interesting... how do you know which bits to accept and which are just metaphors or allegory?

I mean, what if Jesus and the ressurection was meant as a metaphor for something and eveyrbody just got it wrong in their interpretation?

Sam[/quote
I use the Bible as a "guide" in areas where it is not expressively plain and clear and this is also where it's many principles come in. The Lord has loaded the book with various moral principles that can apply in innumerable ways. "Love you neighbor as yourself" being one such biblical principle that is a broad and general guide for action rather than a specified command requiring a particular and very defined action. If, though, it makes a clear and specific statement on an issue, it then steps beyond being just a general guide into now stating a specific and fixed matter that is not something subject to our imaginative application that can carry it off to who knows where. If miracles such as the resurrection of Jesus Christ had a sufficient number of public witnesses to confirm it, (which it did,) then this is not just some imaginative expression of fiction...It must be acknowledged as a physical event which actually happened. However, when Nathan the prophet confronted King David with the story of a man who had killed another just to get this man's little ewe lamb he, Nathan the prophet, didn't bother to call any witnesses in to confirm this story because there weren't any...It was just an imaginative "story" of fiction used to illustrate a moral tragedy to David of his own murder of Uriah the Hittite, Bathsheba's husband and David quickly understood that the story was just that...A fictious story. God in the Bible has nothing against the idea of using fiction at times, but where the unusual event has been accompanied by witnesses and valid testimonial signs and wonders we must revere it as being something far beyond fiction. If it speaks specifically then we are to interpret it specifically...If it makes a general statement then a general obligation is forthcoming...If it lays down only a moral principle then it can apply innumerably. He has given us a book that can never be accused of being non-usable to us through it's insufficient expressions.

 

[WarEagle]

There is no where in scripture that says that God has another means to save people without hearing the gospel. That's an impossibility. That's been God's methodology since beginning with Adam up until this current time in our existence.

What gospel did Adam hear?

 

[chilehed]

...It says in the bible that anyone who does not accept Jesus as their saviour is doomed to burn in hell for all eternity....

Not exactly. It says that if you accept him you will be saved, and if you reject him you won't.

But someone who never heard of him can't reject him, right? You can't reject what you don't know about.

The idea that one must have heard of Jesus in order to be saved is a Protestant idea.

All Christians agree that Scripture says that salvation is due to the grace of God and the merits of Christ alone.

All Christians also agree that Scripture says that IF one has faith in Christ THEN one will be saved..

Many Protestants add to that an ELSE statement: ELSE you burn. But I don’t agree that that’s what Scripture actually says.

Scripture says that everyone has some idea of God. And everyone does, even if that idea is nothing more than being able to distinguish between oneself and others and having some concept of right and wrong.

Scripture also says that even those who have never heard the gospel have no excuse, which logically means that God must make some sort of provision for those people. And Jesus said that He has other sheep who are “not of this fold”.

The Catholic Church teaches that “those who, through no fault of their own, do not know the Gospel of Christ or his Church, but who nevertheless seek God with a sincere heart, and, moved by grace, try in their actions to do his will as they know it through the dictates of their conscience—those too may achieve eternal salvation”.

God gives everyone the grace and ability to make a freewill decision for or against him, at some time in their lives. If they turn toward him, it's entirely due to the grace and merits of Christ - even if they didn't know it.

 

[James1979]

WarEaglie,

Adam heard from the mouth of God. Christ is the chief messenger, the God I AM delivered the gospel to his creation (human). Before Moses begin to pen down what God told him to write down from the book of Genesis to Deuterumony, the gospel was already known to the people. Of course, we know more in depth of the gospel than the old testament but they still had the gospel.

So sometime in Adam's life he was quicken by the spirit of God as he heard from the mouth of God, unknown to Adam the exact precise time it happen.

 

[WarEagle]

WarEaglie,

Adam heard from the mouth of God. Christ is the chief messenger, the God I AM delivered the gospel to his creation (human). Before Moses begin to pen down what God told him to write down from the book of Genesis to Deuterumony, the gospel was already known to the people. Of course, we know more in depth of the gospel than the old testament but they still had the gospel.

So sometime in Adam's life he was quicken by the spirit of God as he heard from the mouth of God, unknown to Adam the exact precise time it happen.

What gospel did Adam hear?

 

[James1979]

wareagle,

You missed the whole point. God himself is the gospel. When God told Satan that he will put enmity between the woman seed and satan's seed, that was the center piece of the gospel as Christ would do his glorious work to save his people. Adam lived for 930 years, he knew his purpose in life was before he breathed that last breath.

 

[WarEagle]

I don't want to distract from the OP's question so I guess I'll just have to let my question go unanswered.