Those who have not heard the Gospel

What in the world are you talkiing about?? I have not ignored this point, you have! People must be sent by God or the lost do not get saved!

Sigh. This whole thread I've been trying to figure out what you are saying and you won't say what you believe. You simply muddle things. I'll ask again. Can a Shinto believer be saved from their sins without the Gospel? Give me a straight answer and quit beating around the bush.

Concerning the light of Christ, note the following Scripture: 2Co 4:3-4--"But if our gospel be hid, it is hid to them that are lost: In whom the god of this world hath blinded the minds of them which believe not, lest the light of the glorious gospel of Christ, who is the image of God, should shine unto them."

What little light people get is usually squelched by Satan. I have witnessed to hundreds of Buddhists and Shintoists, and never met a single one who came close to knowing Christ through natural revelation. It is impossible.

And you have ignored my post that it is not the facts or the history about Christ that saves, but Christ Himself is God's ultimate revelation. I'll put it in blue so you'll feel right at home. "God, who at sundry times and in divers manners spake in time past unto the fathers by the prophets, Hath in these last days spoken unto us by his Son, whom he hath appointed heir of all things, by whom also he made the worlds" (Heb 1:1-2). Without the advanced revelation of Jesus Christ Himself, there is no salvation anywhere in the world.

 

This verse might help to cement that.

Or this one.

 

From Post 40 --

Hint: We are talking about salvation.

Hint: These questions Paul asks ARE the questions of this thread!!
The scope is for "whoever" -- without limit.

How then will they call on Him in whom they have not believed?
How will they believe in Him whom they have not heard?
And how will they hear without a preacher?
How will they preach unless they are sent?

I find it hard to believe that you find this to be vague or non-specific to the point of this thread!

Now for the answer that Paul gave -- the one you keep avoiding in all your posts.

 

Now might be a good time to talk about Paul's words in Heb 11 where we DO see salvation in the OT INCLUDING the case of those who were taken to heaven without dying.

in Christ,

Bob

 

HP: The discussion is focused primarily, as I see Pastor Bob and BR addressing the issue, surrounding the idea of all men having been granted the gospel message. How do ‘answers to life’ relate or equate to ‘all being presented the gospel message?’ One can certainly have a conscience, believe in some form of creation, and have a desire to live forever, yet never have heard the good news of salvation, could they not?

 

Going back to post 67 we see answers already to questions asked on this page

Amen!

I think the real crux of differing POV here is that some would state that without a technical detailed and specific account of the life of Christ (to some level of detail - draw your own line as each poster wishes) - the lost can not be saved.

On the other hand - the Bible points to a general knowledge and accountability in John 1, Romans 1, Romans 10 etc that IS tied not just to "failure" as we see in Romans 1 but is ALSO tied to SUCCESS as we see in Romans 2 and Romans 10.

The position of one side here is that the general knowledge God gives EVEN in conjunction with the convicting Holy Spirit AND Christ standing at the door and knocking -- is insufficient to get to the Romans 2:14-16 "result" that Paul declares it can have in some cases.

Given that this is "insufficient" and given that "missionaries are not assigned to every person on the planet" -- they see God as "giving many lost people no chance at all".

But here is the deal - where there is no accountability - no individual opportunity to act and to be saved - there is no penalty - no justice in condemnation. So the Bible says ALL the world is accountable (Romans 3, Gal 3) and also ALL the world is REACHED with the light of Christ John 1 and the convicting Holy Spirit John 16 and the voice of salvific revelation Romans 10.

The same group that wants to say "All THE WORLD is accountable" in Rom 3, Gal 3, DOES NOT want to admit that ALL the World is also reached as we see in John 1, and John 16 with REAL salvific work.

in Christ,

Bob

 

Let's see how far that principle goes --

1. Gal 1:6-11 ONE and only ONE Gospel (means of salvation) in ALL of time.

2. The SAINTs of the OT saved -- fully saved under that ONE Gospel such that some of them are even taken to heaven even BEFORE the cross as Heb 11 states.

3. ALL the righteous saints RAISED in the first resurrection - that takes place at the rapture and they are ALL called "the DEAD in Christ". -- Saints IN ALL ages called the DEAD in Christ. 1Thess 4

4. 1Cor 10 points to the Hebrews BAPTIZED and drinking from the SPIRITUAL rock - Christ!

These are those whom you might today want to argue "did not have the critical mass in the amount of story they knew - to be saved".

in Christ,

Bob

 

HP: I see the main issue possibly slightly different. I see the main issue as to whether or not ‘general knowledge and accountability’ equates to ‘all receiving the light of salvations offer.’ Skip the technical detailed part. Could that simply not be, in light of the fact that no one has stated or implied anything closely resembling your words, a mere false facade offered for the express purpose of trying to grant to a failing notion positive traction at the expense of fair play?

Another crucial area is whether or not one can believe in a name they have never heard of and if one can place their faith and trust in a name they know not. Is the name of Jesus intuitively given to all by God as well? There is no other name under heaven whereby men can be saved other than Jesus. By what name are those saved that have not heard His name uttered?

HP: Salvation being the results is not stated or implied in Romans 2: 14-16. Nothing grants you the right to say that it is.

HP: Far to the contrary. All men that are lost are lost because they did not live up to the light of their own conscience. ALL had a chance to do something other than what they did under the very same set of circumstances, but chose to sin and thereby inherited damnation as the just recompense of their formed intents of selfishness. Every lost person had an opportunity to obey the light of their conscience and thereby do that which would have been pleasing to God, but all have failed as Scripture testifies. Lost people have had a chance to please God but all have failed. What is this business of not having a chance, as if though wicked sinful men are mere victims of their circumstances? You will not find that in the Word of God.

HP: Accountability starts with obedience to the light of conscience BR, and for this knowledge man is held universally accountable. Only IF man hears and rejects the gospel message is he held accountable for rejecting an offer of hope.

Scripture does not state or imply in any absolute sense that all men have received the offer of salvation. Christ died for all, and His suffering and death is sufficient to satisfy the demand of the law for every sin committed, and God desires that all hear and come to repentance, but God’s will in this case does not necessitate the outcome that some would have us to believe is true, i.e., that all are granted the opportunity to hear the gospel message of hope.

 

I finally think--think--I understand where you are coming from on this passage. I wish you would quit with the "hint, hint" and actually say what you believe. This is a debate thread, you know. In a formal debate, each side presents a position, a rebuttals are given to the other side. I guess I expect some clarity even in an Internet "debate."

If I have you correctly, you are saying that these questions in Romans 10 are questions to be answered later in the chapter. The standard view, and my view, is that they are rhetorical questions, with obvious answers. "How shall they hear and be saved without a preacher?" Answer: "They won't!" That my interpretation is the correct one is proven by the fact that 15b quotes Isaiah on the beauty of the feet of the messenger. If the question were to be answered by, "Well, they can hear without a messenger," then Paul wouldn't be praising the messenger with the words of Isaiah.

Again, the verbs of the questions in vv. 14-15 in the Greek NT are what are called "deliberative subjunctive." Dana and Mantey in their Greek grammar say, "When interrogation does not assume an answer in actual fact, but represents deliberation or is employed as a mere rhetorical device, the subjunctive is used" (A Manual Grammar of the Greek NT, p. 171). In other words, these are clearly rhetorical questions, rather than questions expecting factual answers later in the discourse.

Now, will you please answer my question: Can a Shinto believer be saved without knowing the Gospel? Pastor Bob stood up like a man and answered it. This time if you don't answer it, I'll just assume you are hiding some belief you consider to be embarrassing. I don't know what else to think. You seem too intelligent to not be paying attention.

 

I have no problems with this. Of course there was salvation in the OT.

 

No, I do not "equate" these two things. One can receive a measure of light that confirms in their heart the existence of God. Then, they may receive more light that convinces them of their accountability to God, and so on.

To say that this man, upon receiving this light, has received the gospel is not practical. It is almost as if God gives them one chance to be saved. That is like explaining to a 12 month old child how to walk and then saying, "This is your only chance; either walk now or forget about it."

Please review the scripture I have offered and see if my conclusion is far-fetched. God wants all men saved. The grace of God that brings salvation has appeared to all men. Can the lack of obedience of one man here in America damn the soul of the man in the Ivory Coast of Africa?

As man responds to the light he's given, God continues to illuminate. If this man is seeking God with his whole heart, God promises to be found.

 

After reading Pastor Bob's post, I am reminded of one verse in the Word of God.

John 3:19 And this is the condemnation, that light is come into the world, and men loved darkness rather than light, because their deeds were evil.

Men loved darkness rather than light. Even though light is revealed to men, men still reject that light and love their own unfruitful works of darkness.

Light has been revealed. Even nature itself declares the handiwork of God. And yet, men choose to ignore the fact that God is trying to reveal His work, His Son's work all around them.

Why? Because their foolish hearts were darkened.

 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Heavenly Pilgrim
...the way I understand you, you plainly equate the light that all men have with having received the gospel.

HP: And so on and so on and so on…..until all have the opportunity to receive the gospel message? Certanly all men receive some light of conscience, and possibly the insight of the existence of some higher power or authority intuitively, but this is not the gospel nor does it lead to the gospel message……..or does it to you?

HP: Would you affirm or deny that such intuitive light and revelation of nature, in and of themselves, will ultimately lead all men to the gospel or not?

HP: This seems to be evidence that indeed you feel all will receive the gospel. Am I not correct?

Now let’s address your suggested notion that it is not evidently feasible in your mind that the lack of obedience of one man here in America damning the soul of the man in the Ivory Coast of Africa. I totally agree. Scripture states that every man is accountable for his own sins and not those of another. If one is damned, there is one cause and it is the sins of themselves, the failure to live in accordance to the light of their own conscience. Just the same, If we fail as believers to spread the good news as we should, I believe that some will in fact not hear the gospel and as such not partake in the grace God has made possible through the gospel. There could be blood on our hands, NOT for the reason they find themselves in hell, but for failure to spread the news of the cure or failure to speak out against sin as we should or set the right example as we are required to set.

It would appear obvious to me that you error in making rejection of Jesus Christ the cure the damning sin in every case. That is simply not in accordance to truth. Indeed many will be damned having had the opportunity to partake of the grace of God but have rejected it, but that is not always the case. Some simply have never heard nor understand the good news of the gospel. They will not be damned for their failure to belive in that which they have not heard, but rather for failure to live in accordance to the light of conscience God gives to all men as Romans 2 testifies concerning.

HP: Yes, and once again, as God continues to illuminate in men’s lives through conscience and nature, will this illumination always lead to all receiving the gospel message? That is the question I still see you failing to answer directly. Either it will and does or it doesn’t. Which is it? From your Ivory Coast illustration you are leaving the clear impression that indeed you do believe God will provide all the gospel, just as I have always believed you felt. How am I wrong? Where am I failing to understand your position?

May God bless you and your family as we give thanks to God for His abundant blessings upon us!

 

Maybe we need to explain what is this "light" in the context of the passage. Of course, the "light" is Christ; but then it is being interpreted as "general revelation" (nature). But then nature has been around even before Christ. So what do people in the world today who have never heard of Christ have that their ancestors before Christ did not have? Is this supposed to be the "drawing" of John 6? That still wouldn't be general revelation. Or if it is throught the conscience, then didn't the people before Christ have conscience too?

From the long post a couple of pages ago, I still ask:

But if that's true, then why do so many truly find it hard to believe? And not just those trying to make excuses for living in sin, but even those in despair, really trying to find meaning to life. And even Christians, admit they have doubts! That argument is just so SUBJECTIVE !
The "Everyone has the light" argument is easy for one to say.

And it is ALSO man's "conscience" that opposes the notion of Hell. Of course, now, instead of the conscience being attributed to general revelation, it is dismissed as "sinful human logic". So again, we have a fundamental attribution shift. The human mind and heart are only valid when they suit the arguments; otherwise, they are totally invalid.

It has also been said that the guiding principle in the universe we see is that of a "jungle" where there is no justice; only "survival": fight to stay alive, or die. Our universal answer to this is "the Fall".
But then, to claim a "fall" then, leaves the realm of general revelation, as that is not observable. If some things in life are good as created by God, and others are fallen, then the argument of general revelation becomes ambiguous, as the mixture of "good" and "bad" in the universe does not tell us what created the good, and what cause the bad, or even if it was separate causes. So can we really claim the person "should have known", but "held the truth in unrighteousness"? It's on this point that all our arguments fall flat. The few times I had tried to use this on my father, he pointed out that the rest of the universe is "violent", and "life only tells you one thing: survive!" and ever since then, it seems the "general revelation" argument has seemed to be more on his side! (Even conservative Christians here and elsewhere use "survival of the fittest" type arguments when defending "the market"!)

Then, when pressed for more answers, we always end up claiming "we can't know everything; just believe by 'faith'". But that actually goes against the "general revelation" argument, as then, general revelation apparently does not really support God; hence; "faith" replaces it. In other words, "general revelation" actually suggests that God can be perceived by sight (even if figuratively, such as a feeling in the heart), but then we always ultimately say "faith, not sight", when questioned.

These are queestions we really need to address.

 

HP: Excellent verse that speaks to the heart of this debate. Men are not sinners because they reject a cure, men are sinners and are damned because of their personal sins. Rejection of the cure of the gospel message indeed seals their fate IF they are fortunate enough to have the opportunity to hear the message of hope, but the damning sin is NOT the rejection of Jesus Christ as so many claim it is. “Your sins have separated you from your God.”

And a Happy Thanksgiving to you and Linda! God is indeed Good!

 

1. The argument is not "God did not care about the World before the coming of Christ".
2. While it is true that Nature gives light about God - the work of the Holy Spirit is that of an infinitely intelligent God on the heart. Might be beyond what you are attributing to conscience.
3. Christ brings light to the world - and has been doing so since the dawn of time. The spiritual rock from which they drank "was Christ" 1Cor 10.

in Christ,

Bob

 

This is being said by atheist darwinsts -- when they see a beautiful garden they see only predation, disease, starvation and survival of the fittest.

The Christian sees -- the work of infinite intelligence, design, love, beauty that is there just for the enjoying and a delicate precise balance in nature.

Hint: Romans 1 refers to that Christian perspective when it comes to the "invisible attributes of God" seen in nature.

1. The origin of the sin and death is "the fall of mankind" according to Romans 5 and Romans 8. As Christians we are inclined to accept the Bible solution.

2. No one has claimed that the vast volumes of truth available in scripture through special revelation is ALSO available to those without scripture in the same level of detail. So it is difficult to explain your argument at that point.

But one thing that is painfully obvious to all - is that flowers do not pop up on Mars if you add enough water. you need SEEDS.

The intelligent design argument is apparent to all (Hint - Brian Greene's Elegant Universe summary as an example of what the atheists are confronted with)

in Christ,

Bob

 

1. This is not "our arguments" it is the ONE God makes in Romans 1.
2. You are so focused on denying the obvious here that you miss it time after time. When we see a sick person we do NOt "become confused because it is ambiguous as to which part of the person is working and which part is sick and so therefore a problem to be fixed". RATHER we see clearly the healthy organs and systems vs the sick and infected ones. We do not go into confused fog trying to figure out the mystery of what it means to have a formerly healthy system now in decay, sickness and decline.

The fog and mystery you are claiming here (at least at that fundamental level) does not exist.

There is no question that "competition exists" but pride and struggle for self-esteem is not the model for Christians. Those who look at the Universe and see "a bunch of Planet earth's teaming with life and all competing for survival" are simply "imagining for the sake of evolutionism".

The fact is that a living planet like this one is the EXCEPTION - like finding an air-conditioned fully funtionally computer center in the middle of the desert.

No such "we find these things all the time -- it is just what the desert DOES" imaginings (no matter how desperately needed by atheist darwinists) pass the test of common sense.

in Christ,

Bob

 

False dicotomy again -- you can not reasonably claim that if general revelation does not answer all questions in the universe -- without scriptre -- then there is no support for God!!

What kind of reason would that be?

General revelation plus the specialized and individual work of GOD the Holy Spirit on the heart - will encourage the person to OPEN The door that Christ knocks on so that He will THEN come in and fellowship as Rev 3 says.

But GR does NOT first carry with it all the answers to the universe FIRST and then based on having ALL knowledge - motivate sinners to accept Christ as your savior.

No such argument has ever been made here.

Be specific -- deal with Romans 1.

The statement says that the "INVISIBLE attributes of God are CLEARLY seen in nature" not just that God - exists but some specifics about the invisible attributes of God.

However all agree we have EVEN MORE attributes of God in the Bible than we have in General revelation and WE STILL need faith. You keep arguing that as long as faith is needed - there is no valid avenue to God, to salvation, no benefit to the work of the Holy Spirit on the heart of ALL mankind IF the response He is working to get from ALL mankind is positive FAITH and acceptance of the will of God in our lives.

Your point that faith should not be needed if valid - viable - workable information is being conveyed - does not work as a valid argument vs general revelation but it also does not work EVEN with the addition of special revelation that we find in scripture.

in Christ,

Bob

 

Amen, Amy!

To me this verse should absolutely solve the entire problem. If a person knows and accepts Jesus Christ as Savior they are saved from sin. If they do not they are not saved. It matters not if they know there is a God or even that they are sinners in need of a Savior from natural revelation, they are still not going to be saved without knowing Christ personally.

BobRyan keeps bringing up the facts of history about Christ. As he says, we are not saved by the facts of history about Christ. As he does not say, we can only be saved through Christ Himself. But one has to see the atonement of Christ as the means of salvation. He doesn't have to know the historical details of the atonement.

It's as if a person in a burning house looks out and sees a fireman on a ladder saying, "Come on, I'll save you." The ladder (the atonement for sin of Christ) is the means of salvation and the fireman (representing Christ) is the person of salvation. Now if the fireman were lying there dead on the ladder, no salvation would take place. A living fireman is necessary, therefore the resurrection of Christ is vital. The details of history--where He was buried, who buried Him there, who saw Him first afterwards--are not important but the resurrection itself is.

We are to give the Gospel to the world, not search for people who have received enough light through nature. The Gospel is very clear in Scripture: Christ died for our sins and rose again. We give the Gospel and people must trust or not trust in the living Christ as their Savior. It is the Gospel that is the power of salvation, not the light of natural revelation.

"For I am not ashamed of the gospel, for it is the power of God for salvation to everyone who believes, to the Jew first and also to the Greek" (Rom 1:16).