Hands Off Indigenous Peoples, No Christian Missionaries Allowed

I don't know about you but coming to know Jesus has radically altered my life. It still is to this very day. Thank God I wasn't left to my own devices. Thank God some folks came to my mom and dad when I was just a baby and witnessed to them and led my mom and dad into a life changing relationship with Jesus Christ. Thank God some folks messed around with my life. I also think of Paul. He messed with a lot of so called "virgin cultures." Just read of what happened in Ephesus. It created quit a riot in that city. Read in the book of Ephesians of Paul's description of the Ephesians before they came to know Christ. Thank God Jim Elliot and others gave their life to mess with a "virgin culture" in Ecuador. This idea of not sharing Christ in so called "virgin cultures" is nothing but political correctness run a muck.

 

Start at Rom 1:18.....None will have an excuse for unbelief.

 

I trust the God of the Universe to be equitable in His dealings with the unsaved who have never heard; specifically since there are "good" unsaved and "bad" unsaved only He can sort this out.

A great book along the lines of this subject is ETERNITY IN THEIR HEARTS, by Don Richardson, ISBN # 0-8307-3837-1

It certainly does not answer all the questions, but it gives enough information that I am content to let God hash out the details.

 

We will be praying for the GOspel to reach this tribe.

 

"good" unsave is still unsaved.

 

Seems the governments to try to stop the Gospel.

http://www.sbcbaptistpress.org/BPnews.asp?ID=28027

 

HP: If we follow the logic of BR and DHK in their false assumption that all have the gospel presented to them, don’t we come to the same absurd position on witnessing or evangelism? This is one time where inconsistency with the ends of their logic is indeed blessed. I am certain both DHK and BR do what they believe they can to evangelize and witness in spite of their false assumptions. I can only say, Oh those blessed inconsistencies!

 

HP: Ro 1:18 For the wrath of God is revealed from heaven against all ungodliness and unrighteousness of men, who hold the truth in unrighteousness;

What? Where is ‘unbelief’ mentioned in this passage?

 

You find it in the context of the rest of the passages which explain this one, like :

Sounds like unbelief to me. They denied the truth revealed to them by God through nature (and a little later in chapter 2 and 3 in their own conscience as well).

Maybe I missed your point???

 

Here is the answer to the question regarding the eternal destiny of those remote primitive tribes. It is that they will not be judged by their rejection of Jesus or their failure to believe in him, for they never heard of him. They will be judged by their failure to keep their own moral code.

Romans 2:14 "For when the Gentiles, which do not have the law, do by nature the things contained in the law, not having the law, they are a law unto themselves; 15 "which show the work of the law written in their hearts, their conscience also bearing witness and their thoughts the mean while accusing or else accusing one another......"

The laws of right and wrong (conscience) are written on their hearts. That conscience is their moral code. At the judgment they will acknowledge that they did not even measure up to a standard they themselves developed. They will acknowledge that they are guilty of breaking their own laws, and that God is just in condemning them.

If God is going to cut them some slack because of their ignorance of the gospel, then Tiny Tim is right--why send missionaries, have them preach the gospel and then take the risk that some who hear (who otherwise would go to heaven) might reject it and be condemned to hell.

In fact, let's just quit preachinig, sending missionaries, doing personal witnessing, so everybody can go to heaven.

 

That's not quite what I was saying. What I meant was, God would know who would have accepted or rejected if they had the opportunity. Therefore people who reject the gospel, would not have gone to heaven anyway. Thing is, while we do think of eternal consequences, it is still better for people to find God through the Bible while they are on Earth, and the earlier the better. So even if I was a universalist, which I'm not, I would still say that it is good to witness and preach the gospel.

I don't think most non-Christians will go to heaven, but I think these primitive, uncontacted tribes are a bit different to a non-christian in, for example, America or Britain.

 

But here in Romans 2, I think Paul is clearly talking about man in a post-regenerate state - the law is written on their hearts as a result of being "born again". Paul is not here talking about the "people who have never heard the gospel.

My argument in support of this appeals to Romans 10 and its allusion to Deuteronomy 30.

In Romans 10, we have this:

5Moses describes in this way the righteousness that is by the law: "The man who does these things will live by them."[a] 6But the righteousness that is by faith says: "Do not say in your heart, 'Who will ascend into heaven?'[b]" (that is, to bring Christ down) 7"or 'Who will descend into the deep?'[c]" (that is, to bring Christ up from the dead). 8But what does it say? "The word is near you; it is in your mouth and in your heart,"[d] that is, the word of faith we are proclaiming: 9That if you confess with your mouth, "Jesus is Lord," and believe in your heart that God raised him from the dead, you will be saved

Note the reference to the writing of the law on the heart - as per Romans 2 as well. Paul connects this rather clearly to the confession that Jesus is Lord. Paul's language here forces us to conclude that Paul intends us to understand the writing of the law on the heart is intimately and causally bound up in the confession that Jesus is Lord. So we really cannot argue that in Romans 2, Paul is talking about the "heathen" being judged according to some moral law written on their heart. Paul is talking about believers in Romans 2.

And note that in the Romans 10 text, Paul is quoting Deuteronomy 30:

Now what I am commanding you today is not too difficult for you or beyond your reach. 12 It is not up in heaven, so that you have to ask, "Who will ascend into heaven to get it and proclaim it to us so we may obey it?" 13 Nor is it beyond the sea, so that you have to ask, "Who will cross the sea to get it and proclaim it to us so we may obey it?" 14 No, the word is very near you; it is in your mouth and in your heart so you may obey it

Paul knows what he is doing. Deuteronomy 30 is about what happens when the covenant is renewed. And, for Paul, the covenant is renewed in the life, death, and resurrection of Jesus Christ. So, again, the writing of the law on the heart is something that happens in a believer, not in a person who has never heard the gospel.

So I have no opinion about how God deals with the heathen who have never heard. I just do not think that Romans 2 tells us the answer.

 

I agree. The Bible does not clearly tell us what happens to those who are unaware of the Gospel. We do not need to know.

Matthew 28:19 has "Go, therefore, and make disciples of all the nations" (NASB), or "So go and make followers of all people in the world” (ICB).

Even if there is some way that Christ secures salvation among non-Christians, that would not be relevant to that command. We simply need to do as He told us to do because He said so.

 

What about..

In flaming fire taking vengeance on them that know not God, and that obey not the gospel of our Lord Jesus Christ: Who shall be punished with everlasting destruction from the presence of the Lord, and from the glory of his power; When he shall come to be glorified in his saints, and to be admired in all them that believe (because our testimony among you was believed) in that day.
2 Thess 1:8-10

So, yer in for it if you don't know God and/or don't obey the Gospel.

 

I understand your point, particularly where you said that God knows who would accept or reject him if they had had the opportunity. Indeed he does.

I also agree that God is just, but no one really wants justice because we deserve condemnation to hell. We want mercy, and God is able to be merciful because of the substitionary atonement provided by the Lord Jesus.

And he has ordained that believers will obtain that mercy through repentance and faith in Jesus; and that we are to preach that gospel to all who will hear.

That leaves the question of how God can be just to those who have never had that opportunity. We dare not plead God's justice for those people. So there has to be some basis on which they are condemned besides rejection of the gospel. I believe Romans 2 does, in fact, teach that their condemnation is based on their inability to keep their own laws of right and wrong.

If God will save someone independently of the gospel, for another reason than repentance toward God and faith in the Lord Jesus, then for heaven's sake, let's quit preaching it.

Except that Jesus told us to preach it.

 

Please do not take this as badgering, but if you are correct in this assertion, then there is some error in the counter-argument that I presented to this position of yours. I suggest that to make your assertion stick, you should point out errors in the argument I presented as to why we cannot see Romans 2 as talking about the unredeemed and how they are judged.

Believe me, I will not jump down your throat and accuse you of being a heretical twister of Scripture if you point out where my argument fails. I leave that to others here who are much more accomplised in those behaviours than me.

 

Your arguments fail miserably.
First let me give you a simple outline of the first three chapters of Romans.
In chapter one Paul addresses the unsaved Gentiles.
In chapter two Paul addresses the unsaved Jews.
In chapter three Paul address both Gentile and Jew alike--for all have sinned and come short of the glory God--there are no exceptions. All need Christ.

Here is your argument, a quote from your previous post:

There is no "pst-regenerate state here. There is the saved and the unsaved. Paul is clearly addressing the unsaved Jew in chapter two, though he makes the occasional reference to the unsaved Gentile (2:14,15). But he uses that as a reference for contrast or rebuke to the Jew. He is speaking to the unsaved Jew. It matters not what your background is: If you are unsaved you are condemned and on your way to hell

The only sin that will send a person to Hell is unbelief in Christ.