Lack of knowledge = Hell?

[Leah]

And you believe a loving, merciful, compassionate and just God would condemn people to spending eternity without him when they have never heard of him and had the chance to accept his love and free gift of salvation?

What a nasty god you serve.

Sin is falling short of the glory of God. If people never get to hear about God, never learn they are sinners deserving of his wrath but that Jesus died to save them and give them eternal life; if they've never been given the chance to accept Jesus and what he did for them on the cross, then how can they be condemned for deliberately rejecting him?
They are still people who have been made in the image of God. The Psalmist says,
"your love, O Lord, endures for ever,
do not abandon the work of your hands." (Psalm 138:8)

Does God create people just to condemn them for never knowing him?

Exactly.

It is written in 2 Peter 3:9 that its not God's desire for anyone to perish but for all to come to repentance.

How can one repent for his/her sins (or even be given the chance to) if he/she hasn't even heard the Truth yet?

God is not unjust like that.

 

[Hentenza]

Oh right.

So I can disobey Jesus' command to go and preach the Gospel? No one needs know what Jesus did for them, since God's attributes can be clearly seen in his creation? In fact Jesus didn't need to come and show us what God was like at all - we all knew, and could tell just by looking at the things he has made?
The heavens DO proclaim the glory of God, but if they told us everything; if creation was sufficient to tell us the Good News, Jesus wouldn't have needed to come at all.

You are missing the point of the verses. God not only revealed himself in creation but also in their hearts (Ecclesiastes 3:11). Those who seek will find God (Deut. 4:19). The problem is not with God but with our sinful nature. Paul tells us that no one seeks God (Rom. 3:11). If it wasn't for God's grace all of us would still be in our transgressions.

There are very few places on earth were the gospel has not been brought in the last 2000 years.

Yes but the whole question of this thread is that if people DON'T get to hear it - what then?

And the scripture tells us that all are without excuse. Those that seek will find, the question should be, who seeks?

Some people are unable to hear the Gospel because there is so much hurt, sin and bad experiences in their lives. How can anyone REALLY hear that God is love, if, for them, love has always equalled sex? How can people hear the news that God accepts them, when no one has ever accepted them, or has taught that they have to earn their acceptance?

Many that have accepted Him have been through tribulation. Many folks have their own "hell on earth", however, they still have no excuse for rejecting Him.

But that is a slightly different topic. The question under discussion was whether God would condemn someone for not responding to the Gospel and accepting Jesus, when they have never heard of him. And no one has ever preached the Gospel to them.

And the scriptures are clear that they are without excuse. Sorry but you are thinking this in a non biblical fashion. God is indeed love and He sent His only begotten son so that those that believe in Him will have eternal life. People are responsible to God for what God has already revealed to them. The Bible says that people reject this knowledge, and therefore God is just in condemning them.

If someone in some distant country has NEVER had access to a Bible, how can they be condemned for not believing in him?

See above.

I'm not talking about people in this country, or the west, who have every opportunity to buy, read and study the Bible, but just don't. We are talking about people who have NEVER had ANY access to missionaries, the Bible, the Gospel and so on. Who die competely ignorant of God and the Good News because no one has ever told them.

There were people in this country before the gospel was preached. Historically there are as many people through history that have heard the gospel as those that have not. Those saved in the OT were saved the same way as in the NT (see Heb. 11). The bible is clear that those who sought His found Him so the only biblical conclusion is that either they found Him or they rejected Him. Any other logic is faulty.

In addition to the verses already presented, here is what scripture says regarding those that have not heard.

Rom. 2
1 Therefore you are inexcusable, O man, whoever you are who judge, for in whatever you judge another you condemn yourself; for you who judge practice the same things. 2 But we know that the judgment of God is according to truth against those who practice such things. 3 And do you think this, O man, you who judge those practicing such things, and doing the same, that you will escape the judgment of God? 4 Or do you despise the riches of His goodness, forbearance, and longsuffering, not knowing that the goodness of God leads you to repentance? 5 But in accordance with your hardness and your impenitent heart you are treasuring up for yourself wrath in the day of wrath and revelation of the righteous judgment of God, 6 who “will render to each one according to his deeds”:[a] 7 eternal life to those who by patient continuance in doing good seek for glory, honor, and immortality; 8 but to those who are self-seeking and do not obey the truth, but obey unrighteousness—indignation and wrath, 9 tribulation and anguish, on every soul of man who does evil, of the Jew first and also of the Greek; 10 but glory, honor, and peace to everyone who works what is good, to the Jew first and also to the Greek. 11 For there is no partiality with God.
12 For as many as have sinned without law will also perish without law, and as many as have sinned in the law will be judged by the law 13 (for not the hearers of the law are just in the sight of God, but the doers of the law will be justified; 14 for when Gentiles, who do not have the law, by nature do the things in the law, these, although not having the law, are a law to themselves, 15 who show the work of the law written in their hearts, their conscience also bearing witness, and between themselves their thoughts accusing or else excusing them) 16 in the day when God will judge the secrets of men by Jesus Christ, according to my gospel.

 

[Strong in Him]

Respectfully, I still want to see how you deal with the issues raised by the apostle Paul in Romans 9.

I may get back to the rest of your reply later, but I HAVE been thinking, and praying, about this.

Overview of the book of Romans
Unlike his other letters, "Romans" is not addressed to a church which Paul had founded - he had not even been to Rome, and the letter was probably written from Corinth. So it is different in style to any of his other letters.
It is thought that Paul's plan, after delivering the money collected to the church at Jerusalem, was to go to Spain, and to go via Rome (Rom 15:23-24). He may have even used Rome as a base for his proposed mission to Spain. As he had never been there, however, the church at Rome did not know him, and may have just gleaned bits and pieces from other people. It is thought that this is why Paul wrote "Romans"; like a statement of faith, setting out his beliefs and teachings by way of introduction .
The book falls into 4 sections:
1. Chapters 1-8 deal with the problem of righteousness - meaning a right relationship with God.
2. Chapters 9-11 deal with the problem of the Jews; God's chosen people.
3. Chapters 12-15 deal with practical questions and issues
4 Chapter 16 is a list of personal greetings, and apparently a letter of introduction for Phoebe.
(This info was taken from a commentary on the book of Romans by William Barclay)

Chapter 9.
(These are my thoughts)
Chapter 9 is the start of Paul's discourse about the Jews. Paul was a Jew, and remained so, even though he accepted Jesus as the Messiah, was called to preach to the Gentiles and argued that the law did not save people and circumcison was unnecessary. He used to go first to the synagogues to debate and was obviously still deeply concerned for them.
His dilemmas were: why had God's chosen people rejected his Messiah? If the Jews had been his chosen people, had he now rejected them because they rejected Jesus? What place did the law have now anyway, since Jesus saves?

Paul begins chapter 9 by talking about the true Israel. Jews were not necessarily Abraham's children just because they were literally descended from Abraham; only if they were children of the promise. (verses 6-8). This was obtained through God's mercy, not by works - because before Rebekah's twins were born, one of them had already been chosen by God to be the father of the 12 tribes. (Verses 10-15. Jacob did not get this promise because of the things he DID; it was given before he was born.) Jews believed if God chose someone it was because he loved them. If someone wasn't chosen, it was because God hated them. So salvation, and righteousness, does not depend on human effort but on God's mercy.

Maybe someone had actually asked Paul why God blamed them (for the crucifixion) when it was his will anyway? (verse 19.) Maybe they were asking why they they had to bear the responsibilty of being known as the people who killed Jesus? Paul quotes from Isaiah (29:16, 45:9) saying, basically, that God is the potter and made, or chose, them (the Jews) for a certain purpose and they had no right to argue with God, or question his intentions.

THIS is the context in which verses 22-23 are written.

"What if God, choosing to show his wrath and make his power known, bore with great patience the objects of his wrath - prepared for destruction? What if he did this to make the riches of his glory known to the objects of his mercy , whom he prepared in advance for glory?"

The thought that came to me as I prayed about this, was that the objects/beings that are definitely destined/prepared for destruction, are the devil and his angels. Lucifer is an example of someone who tried to answer back to God; who was not content with how he had been made, but wanted the power and glory that God had. He was a pot that argued with the potter. God threw him, and his angels, out of heaven, and they ARE doomed, they will never be able to repent.
God tolerates Satan and allows evil to remain in the world. What if he does this for the benefit of his children - us, those whom he created and made in his image? (Elsewhere in the NT it says that God is delaying Jesus' return so that people may be able to repent.) I actually like that thought - God DOES allow evil and suffering, but only for our benefit so we may repent and turn to him, and He works for good IN all things.

But in the context, I'm not sure Paul does mean that.
It seems that he said, or the Jews thought, that THEY are the objects of God's wrath, (for rejecting Jesus.) The Jews were not created to be objects of God's wrath, for destruction; they were God's beloved, chosen people, with whom he made a covenant. But they had been rejected - or some of them had - in order that the Gentiles might hear, and be able to respond to, the Gospel. God did not destroy the nation when they broke his covenant after being given so many chances, nor when they rejected his Son and had him killed - because he wanted the Gospel to be taken to the Gentiles. He was giving others the chance to be "children of the promise".

So some Jews were still objects of his wrath. They rejected Jesus, so - like eveyone who rejects what Jesus has done for them - they remain in their sin, far from God, not reconciled to him. The wrath of God is against sin. Everyone who remains in their sin, refuses to ask for forgiveness and accept Jesus as their Saviour, is still God's enemy, far from God. He loves them, because he loves, and died for, sinners. But they are still under his wrath.


I do not believe these verses say, or show, that God created some people with the specific purpose, or intention, of destroying or sending them to hell.

 

[Tzaousios]

I may get back to the rest of your reply later, but I HAVE been thinking, and praying, about this.

Thank you for your attention. I am looking forward to your replies.

This was obtained through God's mercy, not by works - because before Rebekah's twins were born, one of them had already been chosen by God to be the father of the 12 tribes. (Verses 10-15. Jacob did not get this promise because of the things he DID; it was given before he was born.)

Amen, all things are obtained through God's mercy, in the end.

However, what do you think the main purpose of Paul's discourse is in vv. 9-13? I find it a bit difficult to accept that it is only about physical, wordly titles and positions. This is especially so if one considers v. 8, which is the antecedent of vv. 9-13.

Romans 9:8

8That is, it is not the children of the flesh who are children of God, but the children of the promise are regarded as descendants.

Here he is drawing a distinction between the flesh and the spirit. True Israel from Israel by virtue of the flesh. This sets the table for the rest of the discourse. The "love-hated" verse and "older shall serve the younger" verses become all the more striking when this is considered.

Maybe someone had actually asked Paul why God blamed them (for the crucifixion) when it was his will anyway? (verse 19.) Maybe they were asking why they they had to bear the responsibilty of being known as the people who killed Jesus? Paul quotes from Isaiah (29:16, 45:9) saying, basically, that God is the potter and made, or chose, them (the Jews) for a certain purpose and they had no right to argue with God, or question his intentions.

THIS is the context in which verses 22-23 are written.

I am not sure what your point is here. Do you think all that Paul means is that the Jews were "chosen" to collude with the Romans in Christ's crucifixion? In other words, it was just a choice for a job to do within history?

Really, I think the potter-clay portion is meant to say that no one, Jew or Gentile, can argue with God no matter what his purpose is, whether that be historical or spiritual or both.

The thought that came to me as I prayed about this, was that the objects/beings that are definitely destined/prepared for destruction, are the devil and his angels. Lucifer is an example of someone who tried to answer back to God; who was not content with how he had been made, but wanted the power and glory that God had. He was a pot that argued with the potter. God threw him, and his angels, out of heaven, and they ARE doomed, they will never be able to repent.
God tolerates Satan and allows evil to remain in the world. What if he does this for the benefit of his children - us, those whom he created and made in his image? (Elsewhere in the NT it says that God is delaying Jesus' return so that people may be able to repent.) I actually like that thought - God DOES allow evil and suffering, but only for our benefit so we may repent and turn to him, and He works for good IN all things.

I understand your viewpoint here. But, if you think a distinction is being made, why is the line drawn at God creating Satan the angel as a vessel fitted out for destruction? Or, similarly, Michael and Gabriel as vessels for honor?

What I mean is, where is the line drawn that the Potter cannot fit out any of the vessels for purposes spiritual or worldly? In other words, why are human beings "off limits"? We see the primary example of a vessel fitted for wrath--Pharaoh--is a human being. One might also consider Esau this kind of vessel.

It seems that he said, or the Jews thought, that THEY are the objects of God's wrath, (for rejecting Jesus.) The Jews were not created to be objects of God's wrath, for destruction; they were God's beloved, chosen people, with whom he made a covenant. But they had been rejected - or some of them had - in order that the Gentiles might hear, and be able to respond to, the Gospel. God did not destroy the nation when they broke his covenant after being given so many chances, nor when they rejected his Son and had him killed - because he wanted the Gospel to be taken to the Gentiles. He was giving others the chance to be "children of the promise".

I agree with the last part about the way being opened for the Gentiles to become "children of the promise" and true Israel. However, I am not sure where you are going with the rest of it before that sentence.

The Jews had already become objects of God's wrath in the past because they frequently broke the covenants, as you mention. This does not mean they were specifically fitted out for destruction as a whole people in the same way as Pharaoh as an individual or say the Canaanites. It is just that God had had enough (not to the extent of entirely disowning them) to open the way to the Gentiles.

So some Jews were still objects of his wrath. They rejected Jesus, so - like eveyone who rejects what Jesus has done for them - they remain in their sin, far from God, not reconciled to him.

Is there a distinction that you are making between objects of wrath and vessels fitted out for destruction?

Everyone who remains in their sin, refuses to ask for forgiveness and accept Jesus as their Saviour, is still God's enemy, far from God. He loves them, because he loves, and died for, sinners. But they are still under his wrath.

If people hate the things of God and have no desire to come to him, I do not see how they will suddenly of some kind of internalized epiphany and suddenly desire the opposite. Do you think that this is possible or does it take something outside of unrepentant sinners to bring them to God?

I do not believe these verses say, or show, that God created some people with the specific purpose, or intention, of destroying or sending them to hell.

First of all, thank you for your consideration in reading the chapter. Nevertheless, I cannot help but think that you ended up validating the presupposition(s) with which you start when approaching Biblical texts, especially difficult ones like this. It was like a self-fulfilling prophecy of sorts.

 

[Duckybill]

It seems to be human nature to try to squeeze as many as we can into the Kingdom of God. Alas,

Luke 13:24 (NKJV)
24 "Strive to enter through the narrow gate, for many, I say to you, will seek to enter and will not be able.

 

[Strong in Him]

Thank you for your attention. I am looking forward to your replies.

It may take a while.

However, what do you think the main purpose of Paul's discourse is in vv. 9-13? I find it a bit difficult to accept that it is only about physical, wordly titles and positions. This is especially so if one considers v. 8, which is the antecedent of vv. 9-13.

He is talking about the Jews, God's chosen people. People were Jews by birth, but they couldn't assume that their "Jewishness" made them ok with God; they had to become "children of the promise"; receive, or "enter into", the promise God made with Abraham. It was Abraham's faith which was credited to him as righteousness. GOD made the promise; Abraham believed, (even though he tried to hurry things along with Hagar!) So out of all God's chosen people, only a portion, or remnant, will receive their inheritance - and it will be through faith in God's promise, not by virtue of genes. (For example, Jacob was chosen because God told Isaac that he would be chosen. He and Esau were in exactly the same position - sons of Isaac, grandsons of Abraham. But Isaac was given a prophecy and promise about Jacob. The 12 tribes would be descended from Jacob, not Esau.)

This is rather like saying that as God created all of us, and as we live in a Christian country, (supposedly), this is enough to make us a Christian. It isn't. We believe that unless a person receives Jesus - accepts the New Covenant that was made and sealed by him - they will not be saved and have eternal life.

I am not sure what your point is here. Do you think all that Paul means is that the Jews were "chosen" to collude with the Romans in Christ's crucifixion? In other words, it was just a choice for a job to do within history?

No. But Paul says, "one of you will say to me, 'then why does God still blame us?' ". (verse 19)
Either that means that someone HAD asked him why God blamed the Jews, or he is anticipating that someone MIGHT ask him why God blamed the Jews, (presumably for rejecting and killing Jesus.) Maybe people had been going around saying this very thing - that the crucifixion was all the Jews' fault? That God's chosen people had murdered his chosen One? It wouldn't have been the first time. In fact, ever since, there have been people who have used this argument as a reason to persecute and kill the Jews.
Paul is trying to answer the question "why did God blame the Jews?"

Really, I think the potter-clay portion is meant to say that no one, Jew or Gentile, can argue with God no matter what his purpose is, whether that be historical or spiritual or both.

Two things here though.
1) I understand that this is a difficult passage - one that some scholars wish Paul had never written - because it is a bad analogy. I can understand the sentiment, but the fact is, clay cannot answer back. It is an inanimate object, and completely passive. Nor does it know anything, or have any feelings, about what it's master is doing.
We do; we have been given minds, hearts and free will by God. We are living people and have been made in his image.
2) People DO argue with God, or at least, pray persistently. Abraham begged God not to destroy a city and asked him if he would still go ahead if 50 righteous people were found there. He kept asking, until God agreed not to destroy the city if as few as 5 people could be found. (Gen 18:16-33). This is often used as an example of intercessory prayer.
Moses pleaded with God not to destroy the nation when they made the golden calf at Mt Sinai, (Ex 32:11-14). Later he said that if God could not forgive the sin of his people, he should blot his (Moses') name from his book, (Ex 32:32). God forgave his people, though he still punished them.
There are many examples of people pleading with God not to judge his people, or pursue a course of action; sometimes that judgement has been lifted, or suspended, following repentance.
Jesus told us all to pray to God for various things - that we be kept from temptation, for example. We pray that God would heal, save, guide and bless those we know and love. I'm sure all of us have prayed that God might let us get a certain job, and other things.

I don't think that it's that none of have the right to question, or argue with, God. The Psalms are full of questions about why God allows certain things; Job questionned God, yet was still considered faithful in not denying him. I think the whole potter/clay thing is about not liking what God has made us, or called/chosen us to do, and questioning his ways or motives. In other words, telling God that we know better than he does, putting ourselves above him, (which is what the devil tried to do.)

I understand your viewpoint here. But, if you think a distinction is being made, why is the line drawn at God creating Satan the angel as a vessel fitted out for destruction? Or, similarly, Michael and Gabriel as vessels for honor?

I'm not saying that this is what this verse means, I was speculating. But God did not CREATE Lucifer for destruction. Lucifer was an angel; like all of God's creation, he was good. The name Lucifer means light.
There is no verse that I know of in Scripture which says that God created evil. People in the OT used to believe that - they believed that both good and evil came from God. But then, the devil isn't mentioned that much at all in the OT. But James says that every good and perfect gift comes from God. Evil is not good or perfect, so it isn't from God. A good and perfect God cannot create evil - that happened because of the freewill that God gave us; whether to serve him or not.

I was saying that when we think about hell, destruction and speculating on the people who will go to hell and who are doomed, one thing is certain - Satan already is. As soon as Lucifer rebelled against God and was thrown out of heaven, he was destined to be destroyed. And I believe he knows it, and is trying to drag as many of God's people down with him as he can. Trying to snatch, or lure, as many people away from God as he can, and trying to prevent others from finding him. This is what we are encouraged to pray and fight against; to make disciples for Jesus.

I agree with the last part about the way being opened for the Gentiles to become "children of the promise" and true Israel. However, I am not sure where you are going with the rest of it before that sentence.

I was speculating on the "objects of God's wrath".
I was wondering if the Jews considered themselves to be objects of God's wrath, since some of them thought that God blamed them (v 19), and may have thought that he had now rejected them in favour of the Christians.
If this WAS true, then God was "bearing with patience the objects of his wrath" (v 22) - the Jews - for the sake of the objects of his mercy - the Gentiles. This is what he says in chapter 11 - because of the sin of the Jews, salvation has come to the Gentiles, (v 11).

If people hate the things of God and have no desire to come to him, I do not see how they will suddenly of some kind of internalized epiphany and suddenly desire the opposite. Do you think that this is possible or does it take something outside of unrepentant sinners to bring them to God?

Well firstly I would ask if you believe in the power of prayer and that the Holy Spirit can convict people of sin and bring them to Jesus? He can do this through inner conviction or use a sermon, circumstances or a prophecy to do this.
There are many examples, Biblically and in history, of people who've worshipped other gods, been satanists, involved in the occult or whatever; turning to God and being saved by him.

Also, this thread is not exactly about people who hate the things of God coming to him. It is a question about whather those who have never heard the Gospel will be sent to hell for what they do not know.

First of all, thank you for your consideration in reading the chapter. Nevertheless, I cannot help but think that you ended up validating the presupposition(s) with which you start when approaching Biblical texts, especially difficult ones like this. It was like a self-fulfilling prophecy of sorts.

Quite the opposite actually.
If you read these verses "cold" - i.e out of the context of the rest of the chapter - it COULD seem that they are saying that certain people were created by God JUST to be sent to hell - "created for destruction." And it seemed that you quoted them to back up that p.o.v. Which is why I said I wasn't sure about them and would need to study further.
I am saying that, having looked at these verses in context, I do not believe they are saying that. Especially when we consider other verses in the Bible, about everyone being a sinner, everyone needing a Saviour, God sending Jesus for everyone; and use our knowledge of God and logic to try to undesrtand what the verses are saying.

In other words, these verses, coming in the middle of a debate about God's relationship with the Jews, neither say, nor prove, that God created some people just so he could send them to hell - that he MADE people to be his enemies.

 

[Lulav]

Everyone deserves hell because all men are sinners. If they have never heard the gospel and had the chance to repent and believe all that means is that they are reprobates and are going to get the punishment they justly deserve.

Why does everyone confuse Heaven and Hell with The New Heaven and New Earth and the Lake of Fire? These are the eternal destinations.

 

[Tzaousios]

He is talking about the Jews, God's chosen people. People were Jews by birth, but they couldn't assume that their "Jewishness" made them ok with God; they had to become "children of the promise"; receive, or "enter into", the promise God made with Abraham.

I understand this. But it does not answer my question. Are you saying that v. 8 is only referring to physical, worldly "inheritance" and "promise"? It is my contention that it is not.

Two things here though.
1) I understand that this is a difficult passage - one that some scholars wish Paul had never written - because it is a bad analogy. I can understand the sentiment, but the fact is, clay cannot answer back. It is an inanimate object, and completely passive. Nor does it know anything, or have any feelings, about what it's master is doing.

It is a clever anology, to be sure. But I would not call it a bad one. I think Paul's point in using the potter-clay imagery is to focus on the aspects of the one who fashions and the ones who are fashioned. It is not to point out the mundane characteristic of clay that it is an inanimate object.

He is likening God to the Potter and specifically mankind as the clay. The potter has exclusive rights to fashion the clay in whatever way he wills. It is of him who wills, not runs. Human beings have no rights over their Creator.

I would like to point you back to a portion of my previous reply that I am not sure you got to:

What I mean is, where is the line drawn that the Potter cannot fit out any of the vessels for purposes spiritual or worldly? In other words, why are human beings "off limits"? We see the primary example of a vessel fitted for wrath--Pharaoh--is a human being. One might also consider Esau this kind of vessel.

Why do you have this notion that somehow human beings are "off limits" when it comes to being fashioned for the sovereign purpose of the Creator, especially if it is for wrath and destruction?

We do; we have been given minds, hearts and free will by God. We are living people and have been made in his image.

There are some major assumptions in this statement. Who are "we" and how do you define "free will" and who is given it by God? What is the extent of this "free will"?

2) People DO argue with God, or at least, pray persistently. Abraham begged God not to destroy a city and asked him if he would still go ahead if 50 righteous people were found there. He kept asking, until God agreed not to destroy the city if as few as 5 people could be found. (Gen 18:16-33). This is often used as an example of intercessory prayer.
Moses pleaded with God not to destroy the nation when they made the golden calf at Mt Sinai, (Ex 32:11-14). Later he said that if God could not forgive the sin of his people, he should blot his (Moses') name from his book, (Ex 32:32). God forgave his people, though he still punished them.

Context is important here. Yes, people can pray and plead their cases before God. But who can do this? Just anyone? The unrepentant, unregenerated sinner does not care about the things of God and will not do it.

Thus, in context, as Abraham and Moses did, it was within the auspices of a right covenantal relationship with God. Regenerate Christians have this privilege as well through the shed blood of Christ of the new covenant.

I think the whole potter/clay thing is about not liking what God has made us, or called/chosen us to do, and questioning his ways or motives. In other words, telling God that we know better than he does, putting ourselves above him, (which is what the devil tried to do.)

But once again, do you not think that the passage expresses that God has the right to fashion human beings for specific spiritual purposes?

There is no verse that I know of in Scripture which says that God created evil. People in the OT used to believe that - they believed that both good and evil came from God.

Even if "Old Testament people believed that" it does not mean that Christians cannot or should not.

The sovereignty of God over all things is clearly proclaimed througout Scripture from Genesis to Revelation. If he does not have ultimate control and authority over evil and its various manifestations, then he is not omnipotent and sovereign. Consider these passages:

Genesis 50:20

20"As for you, you meant evil against me, but God meant it for good in order to bring about this present result, to preserve many people alive.

Job 1:12

12Then the LORD said to Satan, "Behold, all that he has is in your power, only do not put forth your hand on him." So Satan departed from the presence of the LORD.

1 Samuel 16:14

14Now the Spirit of the LORD departed from Saul, and an evil spirit from the LORD terrorized him.

Mark 5:13

13Jesus gave them permission. And coming out, the unclean spirits entered the swine; and the herd rushed down the steep bank into the sea, about two thousand of them; and they were drowned in the sea.

It is not some cosmic battle between good in evil in which both sides are equal with each other and have an equal chance of victory if one side falters. Satan and the fallen angels are not God's equals. God has control and sovereignty over them just like the rest of his creation. To assert otherwise would be to fall into the ancient Manichean heresy.

But James says that every good and perfect gift comes from God. Evil is not good or perfect, so it isn't from God. A good and perfect God cannot create evil - that happened because of the freewill that God gave us; whether to serve him or not.

Then, if you hold to the principle that all of Scripture is the infallible and inspired word of God, how do you account for the passages that mentioned above and the ones to which you alluded?

I was saying that when we think about hell, destruction and speculating on the people who will go to hell and who are doomed, one thing is certain - Satan already is. As soon as Lucifer rebelled against God and was thrown out of heaven, he was destined to be destroyed.

Are you sure about this? It is my contention that God had a specific purpose for Satan and that he was fashioned as a vessel for destruction from the beginning. Why should human beings, also as God's creations, be off limits to fashion according to his purpose?

And I believe he knows it, and is trying to drag as many of God's people down with him as he can. Trying to snatch, or lure, as many people away from God as he can, and trying to prevent others from finding him. This is what we are encouraged to pray and fight against; to make disciples for Jesus.

This gives me the impression that you might think God and Satan are in a cosmic tug-o-war match for human beings. Has God not foreseen the outcome? Has he not decreed that his sovereign purposes will come to pass?

Well firstly I would ask if you believe in the power of prayer and that the Holy Spirit can convict people of sin and bring them to Jesus? He can do this through inner conviction or use a sermon, circumstances or a prophecy to do this.
There are many examples, Biblically and in history, of people who've worshipped other gods, been satanists, involved in the occult or whatever; turning to God and being saved by him.

Of course I do. The power of prayer and especially the drawing and transforming power of the Holy Spirit will bring about the salvation of God's elect. We pray and hope for things that we do not yet know and cannot see. God does not have to hope and deal with not being able to (fore)see all things which come to pass.

However, respectfully, I think you missed the point of my question here. Do these pagans, godless atheists, and satanists turn to God of their own power and desire and away from their unrepentant sin?

Also, this thread is not exactly about people who hate the things of God coming to him. It is a question about whather those who have never heard the Gospel will be sent to hell for what they do not know.

Yes, but it is definitely related and can be addressed in this discussion without derailing the thread. We have done well with this so far.

If you read these verses "cold" - i.e out of the context of the rest of the chapter - it COULD seem that they are saying that certain people were created by God JUST to be sent to hell - "created for destruction." And it seemed that you quoted them to back up that p.o.v. Which is why I said I wasn't sure about them and would need to study further.

I understand your apprehensions about this. Context is very important. Nevertheless, I think the interpretation that I have put forward is not unfounded and fits with the rest of it.

In fact, I am not rejecting your interpretation entirely. I think Romans 9 is discussing Jews and Gentiles beyond merely a worldly, physical "inheritance" or purpose. There is a definite spiritual dimension to the discussion of the potter-clay and vessels.

As for your comment about "that POV," as I said before, I think it is a mischaracterization because it labels that interpretation in a pejorative manner out of dislike for what it is perceived is being taught.

Especially when we consider other verses in the Bible, about everyone being a sinner, everyone needing a Saviour, God sending Jesus for everyone; and use our knowledge of God and logic to try to undesrtand what the verses are saying.

I hope you do not imply that I have not prayerfully and logically tried to understand what they are saying in the interpretation at which I have arrived.

 

[Yab Yum]

And whether judged by the law etched in stone or one etched in hearts, no flesh shall be justified by works of the law.

There are no born-again Muslims or Hindus or Buddha-worshippers. One must be born again. There is only one way to God, that way is the Lord Jesus Christ who lived and died and rose again in order tnat the good news of His gift can be preached to all so they may be saved from their sins.

Slice it anyway you like, as thin as it goes, there is no room for equivocation on this issue in the Scriptures.

I better buy a lottery ticket.

 

[Hentenza]

I better buy a lottery ticket.

You already have the winning number.

 

[Strong in Him]

I am not feeling well enough to get back to this thread for the moment; I may be able to return later.

My basic position still is though that if there are any people in far off countries who have not heard the Gospel, and called out to God to be saved from their sin, then God is loving, merciful and just and will deal with them accordingly.

Personally I think that they would not be sent to hell - I've given my reasons in previous posts and won't go over it all again. But such an action would be incompatible with the God of love and Grace whom I see revealed in his word.

I could be wrong - we all could.
I could get to heaven and find that God has sent people to hell even though they were never given a chance to find the way to heaven; some people here could get to heaven and meet people there who never heard the Gospel while on earth.

I may be back - in the meantime, enjoy the debate.

 

[Tzaousios]

I am not feeling well enough to get back to this thread for the moment; I may be able to return later.

I may be back - in the meantime, enjoy the debate.

I hope you will feel better soon! Please see my post #49 when you have the time and energy. There are some issues that I would still like to discuss in greater detail. Thanks!

 

[Philothei]

Mod hat on ​

Thread has been opened. Please note the following rules and avoid breaking them:
Preamble:
This site has the goal of facilitating discussions between various Christian faiths as determined by adherence to Christian Forums' Statement of Faith and the Trinitarian nature of God. ​

So be respectful to one another. Do not imply that they are either not 'believe the right God" or that they are lesser Christians... Also stop before you post and review your post for flaming the other. Use a posting style that is respectful and edifying.Also per our preamble and flaming rule:

Messages posted to this board must be polite and free of personal attacks, threats, crude or sexually-explicit language, rude comments, and innuendo.

Flaming
You will not insult, belittle, mock, use derogatory nicknames in reference to other members, or personally attack other members or groups of members. Do not goad another member or start call-out threads. Do not state or imply that another member or group of members who have identified themselves as Christian are not Christian. Avoid using sarcasm to attempt any of the above. This flaming rule also applies to public religious figures.​

If you are flamed, do not respond in-kind. Alert staff to the situation by utilizing the report button. ​

​

There is really no reson why the conversation should result in personal attacks and derogatory comments. No point is made that way and we will end up closing this thread permanently.​

Many posts were deleted and edited. If you have questions about your post just pm me.
Mod hat off​

 

[Yab Yum]

Why does everyone confuse Heaven and Hell with The New Heaven and New Earth and the Lake of Fire? These are the eternal destinations.

And, like all eschatological issues this one will itself go around in circles until the end of the world.

FWIW here is my 2 cents.

Mark 12:25
For when they rise from the dead, they neither marry nor are given in marriage, but are like angels in heaven.

Now if we are "like angels" it may be a good idea to find out what an angel is like.

First, there are dark angels as well as angels of light.

Second, IMHO since God has given his plan of salvation to humankind, but not to angels, an angel is a being which cannot "change its mind", i.e. "repent". We are able to repent only as human beings. Angels cannot, and after we are raised, neither can we. This is why we believe that our actions in this life will shape our eternities.

If this is true then the inability to change my mind, after I die, could itself be heaven - or hell. A pig in the mud, who is quite happy being a pig in the mud forever, is in hell, if the possibility ever existed for that pig to be magically transformed into an animal with greater dignity. A poor man who is quite happy being poor forever, is in hell, if the possibility ever existed for that poor man to become wealthy. Likewise a child, who is quite happy to remain a child forever, is in hell, if the possibility ever existed for that child to grow up into a healthy adult.

IMHO hell is the contentment of remaining in a state which does not attain the true purpose of my life, to be unrepentant of my seeing "in a mirror dimly".

1 Corinthians 13:11
When I was a child, I spoke like a child, I thought like a child, I reasoned like a child. When I became a man, I gave up childish ways.

John 12:8
For the poor you always have with you, but you do not always have me.

Luke 15:16
And he was longing to be fed with the pods that the pigs ate, and no one gave him anything.

There are people who are beastly, poor, childish. We have to pray for them and help them and tell them about the good news that God loves and desires them. We may also hope that all these people are saved. But will they be?

Will we?

 

[LittleLambofJesus]

Originally Posted by Lulav Why does everyone confuse Heaven and Hell with The New Heaven and New Earth and the Lake of Fire? These are the eternal destinations.

I guess that depends ones view of the LoF shown in Revelation.
I would be curious to how the apostate Jews would view it, but alas, they do not read our NT/NC

Scripture4All - Greek/Hebrew interlinear Bible software

Matthew 23:2 saying "upon the Seat of Moses are seated the Scribes and the Pharisees
Matt 23:33 "Serpents! produce of vipers! how? ye may be fleeing from the judging of the geennhV <1067>

Reve 20:10 And the Devil, the one-deceiving them, was cast into the Lake of the fire and of sulfur

http://www.christianforums.com/t7434988/
OC Jerusalem and Lake of Fire