Daniel R:

“CS, et al, this young girl has deeply felt philosophical questions and you’re arguing about theological nuances and eschatology.  It’s no wonder the church is losing young people in droves.”

May I offer that part of the reason the church is losing young people in droves is specifically because theological nuances and eschatology is being pushed to the side and forsaken in favor of more squishy matters?  Don’t get me wrong--our faith is both one of feelings and experiences as well as knowledge and wisdom, but the recent trends are heavily tilted towards the former instead of the latter.  And when this is removed from our churches, then we have no firm bedrock or foundation in Scripture, which is where crazy things come in like the denial of Hell.

And, you are absolutely right that telling the girl, “God does as He pleases,” would not be the effective way to witness to her.  The same is true in saying only, “Jesus died for you.” Without the context and understanding of the Law, and how we are sinners before God, a man dying on a tree and hearing of a God who can do things that seem illogical to us makes no sense.  Instead, I would walk her through the Ten Commandments, her conscience, and the penalty of sin.  Then, depending on how she reacted, I would present the message of grace. 

As for this discussion, it was geared towards people who declare to be Christians, and not necessarily to the lost.

--
CS

Joe:

“Why does a just God condemn people to eternal unbearable suffering for being born into and living in the wrong culture during the very few years of their existence?”

God does not condemn people for living in the wrong culture.  God condemns them for sinning against Him.

Think of it this way: if you don’t obey your teachers, you will get in trouble at school.  if you don’t obey your boss, you will get fired.  If you don’t obey a police officer or the law of the land, you will get fined, arrested, and possibly executed, depending on the crime.  What is the difference in all of these cases?  It’s not the act of disobedience that draws the penalties, but against whom the crime was committed. 

Now, take that with our God.  If you sin against Him, a perfect and infinite being, the punishment would be commensurately perfect and infinite.  We all know what sin is, because God has written it onto our hearts and minds.  And we willfully choose to engage in it.  Look at children--do they need to be taught how to lie or steal?  No.  But do they know that it is wrong when they do it?  Yes. 

Look at yourself in the mirror of the Ten Commandments.  Have you ever lied, stolen, blasphemed, or committed adultery or murder in your heart?  If so, God sees you as guilty before Him.

This is why Jesus Christ came to earth and died for our sins, so that he took the punishment that none of us could pay for.  He did this all so that He can get the credit and the glory.

Does this make a little more sense now?

--
CS

CS,

I’ll leave alone your logic that “It’s not the act of disobedience that draws the penalties, but against whom the crime was committed” only remarking that I would not think of teaching my children that.

I think you got at the girl’s question without meaning to:

Why is being born into, say, Tibet and naturally taking on the native culture and religion a crime in the eyes of God, punishable by eternal fire?

Or, why does Christianity condemn Ghandi to hell while pious Christian slaveowners (who beat, raped and killed those slaves) in the South before the Civil War go to heaven?

Do you see my point?

Thanks for all the discussion on these questions. Its amazing the diversity of opinions within the body of Christ.

One comment, someone was concerned that the young lady who wrote the original email had not heard the Gospel. At our church we preach verse by verse through the Bible (we are currently in Luke 4), so we do hit the Gospel on occasion. We’re kind of a seeker sensitive, purpose driven, culturally relevant Bible church. Weird, huh?

John:

Those were very insightful and interesting questions.  Permit me to address some of them, and hit you with the main point last:

“Logically, that means that everyone in the OT is in hell (assuming an understanding of hell being a place of eternal fire, torment and punishment). If that’s not the case, then where does the ‘Jesus only’ argument stand?”

In the OT times, sins were covered by the offering of sacrifices to God with a hope that one day His Messiah would come to finish the job.  So when someone sinned, that person would go to have an animal sacrificed in his stead.  As it says in Hebrews 9, “without shedding blood is no remission [of sins].”

This blood sacrifice has its roots from even the Book of Genesis, when God killed animals to make the first skins for Adam & Eve, and even the offering of animals to God by Abel.  And, similarly, even back in the Garden of Eden, it was foretold that a Messiah would deliver people from this.

In many OT Books, we find mention of people going to Heaven (Elijah) and people in Hell (those in Sodom).  It was through the covering of blood sacrifices and hope in the Messiah (Jesus) that this was covered.  Still “Jesus Alone,” just in a different format.

Just like you said, “If Jesus’ life, death and resurrection is ‘payment’ (or whatever your preferred atonement theory is) and subsequent hope once and for all, then it means that it cannot be limited spatially or temporally (much like God, I suppose).” But, the thing to remember, is that people can accept or reject this payment of their own accord.  No one is forced to receive it.

“It also raises questions about, say, the rich young man who was told to sell all his possessions. No mention there of being born again, baptism or whatever. But then, I suppose he was asking about a very specific ‘deed’ he thought he needed to do. But why not simply say, “Hear the Gospel, repent and be baptised”?”

When people approached Jesus, he gave the Law to those who were proud, and a message of grace to those who were humbled.  In the case of the rich young man, he set up his wealth as an idol to himself, and that is why he walked away crying.  When we see people broken in spirit and knowing their transgressions against the Law, such as the sinful woman washing Jesus’ feet with her hair, He tells her that her sins were forgiven.  He chose not to repent, as far as the Gospels present the story, and went off crying, not asking for mercy.

“Or what about an, unapologetically, emotive example. A loving, caring, faithful Christian couple has their new-born baby die. Are you who say that the Gospel must first be heard going to tell that couple that their child is currently under eternal torment in the fires of hell?”

God is clear that He will show mercy upon whom He will show mercy, and grace upon whom He will show grace (Romans 9).  So it is His decision about where those children would go.  However, we do have a story about David’s first child with Bathsheba who died, where in 2 Samuel 9, he says, “But now he is dead, wherefore should I fast? can I bring him back again? I shall go to him, but he shall not return to me.” While this is something that is up for interpretation and discussion, I tend to believe that it is a sign that God has mercy on young children whom die, when also expounded upon by Jesus receiving children in His time.

So, is Jesus only The Way?  John 14:6 has the most direct answer to this.  “Jesus saith unto him, I am the way, the truth, and the life: no man cometh unto the Father, but by me.”

Why is it such a narrow view?  Because God Himself said that it is.

--
CS

if anyone is looking for another way besides jesus, i can not find another way, i have looked and read, and i find no other way,paul said in galatians 1: 7-8 if anyone preached any other gospel , let him be accursed. these are words not to be played with, people are looking for their own way, but there is no other way but jesus, people do not want the truth because their deeds are evil, they are looking for somthing that will go along with their life style. so if anyone says that jesus is not the only way and try to preach another way that is antichrist, and they are accursed.  and those people in the old testament was kept by god untill jesus came and preached to the souls , and then he brought them out , the gospel of jesus is clear, it is to late to be playing around with what god has said, the signs of the end times are upon us.god loves us,and if we come to him, he will in wise cast us out, our care for people will sometimes blind our eyes to the truth, and if this girl is a christian, she does not need to be in that close fellowship with someone that will make her think that god is unjust,

John:

Good follow-up.  I like that you are searching the Scriptures for answers.

“Unless I am misreading it, this passage says that sacrifices are not the way to heaven. My understanding of why, say, Abraham, was accepted by God was, purely and simply, God’s Grace. Abraham, basically, understood what God was all about - he ‘got’ God. Romans 4:3 “Abraham believed God, and it was counted to him as righteousness.” Nothing to do with works, sacrifices or anything else. Abraham was righteous in God’s sight because he ‘believed’ in God.”

That is absolutely right.  Note that I said that the sacrifices were for a _covering_ of sins, not for the forgiveness.  And Abraham believed in the coming of a Messiah who would be able to _forgive_ sins.

If it was a simple matter of belief in the OT days, then why the sacrifice of animals?  Or, conversely, if it was a matter of sacrifice of animals, why, then, believe?  Both parts played a vital role.

“Your suggestion of ‘Jesus alone’ as simply being a ‘different format’ suggests to me that you mean that Jesus is the definitive animal sacrifice.”

Jesus Christ was the Lamb of God, the ultimate sacrifice for sin.  Not an “animal” like a common barnyard beast, but the perfect, sinless one, upon whom our sin debt was paid in full.

“If God will ‘show mercy upon whom He will show mercy’, does that not rather undermine the ‘Jesus alone’ argument as well?”

No, the two concepts are not mutually exclusive.  God will show mercy upon whom He will show mercy, and that person will be forgiven by Christ alone.

“That brings us to your final comment using “I am the way, the truth and the life...”. I wonder if the emphasis here is too much on the word ‘the’ and its exclusivity rather than a focus on what Jesus is saying He ‘is’.”

The idea of the Trinity can be quite confusing.  Let’s think of the question this way: can a person have their sins forgiven outside of the sacrifice of Jesus Christ?  According to the Bible, the answer is, “No.” Therefore, Jesus Christ is the only way, and this verse stands firm.

God cannot stand divided between Himself.  The Will of the Father, Son, and Holy Ghost are all uniform.  So if one person in the Trinity would deny salvation, all of the Godhead would deny salvation.  This means that if that person is not covered by Jesus alone, nothing else in the Godhead would save them.

John 5 has some great information on the relationship between Jesus and the Father.  “For as the Father hath life in himself; so hath he given to the Son to have life in himself; And hath given him authority to execute judgment also, because he is the Son of man.”

Just curious, what is your spiritual background?  Do you believe people go to Heaven or Hell?  What happens to us when we die?

--
CS

CS, once again, thank you for the reply.

I guess the next question then is what’s the difference between covering and forgiveness, particularly in the context here? Perhaps more to the point is what happened to Abraham when he died and before the cross ‘happened’? (But then we’re back to the temporal issue and that makes my head hurt).

In fact, your later discussion of the Trinity may lend some credence to the idea that the actions of the cross were not temporally limited and that only by acknowledging the Trinitarian nature (I hesitate to use the word) of God can we begin to explain how the effect of the cross is for all times. The question then shifts to what happens after death. For those who have been unable to hear the Gospel, through an accident of geography or time, is there an opportunity to choose - the time of judgement perhaps? Hmmm… going off at a bit of a philosophical tangent I think. But then maybe that’s a fruitful area of exploration for Rick’s question.

As for by bio - I’m a mature student of divinity at Edinburgh Uni. My home church is very conservative evangelical with a largely literal approach to scripture. All-in-all, a package with which I am becoming increasingly discontented. I hesitate to apply any labels to myself largely because I don’t fit any of them comfortably.

Do I believe in heaven and hell? Yes, but perhaps not in the way you’d think. I’ve already hinted at my idea of hell in my previous contribution. As to what it’ll be like after death, I simply don’t know, but it’d be great to meet up and compare notes when we’re there. But that’s unlikely since, according to deaubry, I’m in with the antichrist and accursed. Still I expect we’ll be more than a little surprised about who is there.

John

Here is my response to Geoff:

Here is my response to Geoff:

Dear Geoff,

Your answers to this young lady were quite adequate, but a couple of your posts voiced the same concern that I had, and I would like to address it: her boyfriend. Is she really searching for truth, or is she searching for a way to reject God’s claims on her life so that she and her boyfriend can fulfill lustful desires. If one can reject God and his claims, then that one can then be free to do what they want without guilt because there is no one to answer to. Lest you think I might be too judgmental, especially not knowing this young lady as you do, let me explain my viewpoint with two comments. First, D. James Kennedy said he was watching a show on PBS, and they were doing it on Darwinism. He said he almost fail out of his chair when the man said, “We believe in evolution because it takes God out of the picture; thus, we can fulfill our sexual lusts without feeling guilty.” Secondly, my own daughter has followed the same path, denying the existence of God or at least any claim on her life, and is living with a divorced man who, by his own admission, divorced his wife to pursue my daughter. I would want to know more about their relationship before I could say that you have truly answered her question. Has she really asked her real question, or has she veiled it in smoke screens? This may be one of those spiritual battles that we are unaware of in the physical realm. My daughter’s name is Mary Grady. Please add her to the prayer list, and thank you for opening this up for others to share.

If you had been born born into Islamic parents in an Islamic country and raised from an early age in the Islamic religion, you’d be comfortable with American Christians believing that God has damned you to Hell?  Would that viewpoint make you more or less likely to be a Christian?

How would you square that if those Americans had perhaps killed your wife and children? Would you get down on your knees and say that Jesus is your personal savior?

I think Jesus would comfort the hurt and wounded, regardless of what they believed, and he would rebuke those, like Job’s friends, who sought to deepen the anguish by adding on a layer of eternal damnation.

Fundamentalism, my friends, has killed more people than gold and silver.  Would you not agree that Scripture has been used as justification to cheat, torture, rape and kill? And, if you agree, how do we know if your interpretation is indeed the Word of God, or simply a rationale for the sin of pride? 

We are men, and sin is the human condition, and we can certainly sin as we apply Scripture. If we were absent sin as we read Scripture, we’d be playing God.  As we condemn others to hell, we take on the guise of God.

The Father, the Son and the Holy Ghost are alive today and they cannot be fit into a book. Do not become Pharisees, more concerned with the law than justice or love, assuming that you know how God thinks and what He will do.

Most assuredly, you do not know the mind of God, or you would would be placing yourself on the level of God, and there may be no greater sin.

Joe:

“If you had been born born into Islamic parents in an Islamic country and raised from an early age in the Islamic religion, you’d be comfortable with American Christians believing that God has damned you to Hell?  Would that viewpoint make you more or less likely to be a Christian?”

Let’s simplify this question by looking at your perspective with a yes or no question.  If a person is born into an Islamic country with Islamic parents with upbringing in the Islamic religion, would that person go to Heaven when he dies?

--
CS

JohnO:

Again, great conversation.  You’re totally right about the “scarlet thread” of Jesus being found all throughout the Bible.  His presence and the shadow of things to come was definitely there in OT times.

--
CS