 |
|
| Author |
Message |
| gay lynn voth Member Joined Jan 25, 2005 693 posts |
 |
Posted Dec 14, 2009; 6:40 pm |
|
Hi Sudsy ... I whole heartedly agree that God can kill. I haven't suggested that God would not be able to do so, have I?  I didn't mean to leave that impression.
My reflections are dealing with whether God 'kills' or destroys evil from an irrational violence that is often linked to 'wrath' or whether God destroys evil based on God's absolute fairness and justice (which includes vengenence). The ultimate judgments of 'good and evil' are reserved exclusively for God. As we see in scripture, these judgments obviously include a sovereign power to destroy evil and favor good.
I think the point I am trying to make may be going missing. All I am trying to suggest is that God has multiple ways of dealing with evil. God can overcome evil through Goodness and from God's character of Love as well as through overwhelming destructive means. I am trying to point out that the Goodness of God in scripture includes caring for humankind, rebuking us, exhorting us to do good, covering our shame, forgiving our sins, removing our guilt as 'far as the east is from the west', delivering us from the oppression of evil, healing us from all kinds of dis-ease and
terror, and resurrecting us from death for eternal life.
Yes, God punishes disobedience. The stories of God doing so are scattered among the stories of God's redemptive acts. While it is true that God destroys, God also forgives. See Psalm 130 - If you, O LORD, kept a record of sins, O LORD, who could stand? But with you there is forgiveness, therefore you are feared. ... O Israel, put your hope in the LORD, for with the LORD is unfailing love, and with him is full redemption, He himself will redeem Israel from all their sins."
See Psalm 77 for some very insightful musings of David's heart. David's 'spirit inquired': Will the Lord reject forever? Will he never show his favor again? Has his unfailing love vanished forever? Has his promise failed for all time? Has God forgotten to be merciful? Has he in anger withheld his compassion? Then I thought: "To this I will appeal: the years of the right hand of the Most High. I will remember the deeds of the LORD; yes, I will remember your miracles of long ago. I will meditate on all your works and consider all your mighty deeds ... What god is as great as our God? You are the God who performs miracles, you display your power among the peoples. With your mighty arm you redeemed your people...." You led your people like a flock"
Are we wondering if God has forgotten us again? Let us remember the mighty works of God ... Then we will put our trust in God and would not forget his deeds, but would keep his commands. May our reflections on God's kindness (especially as it is revealed in Christ) lead us to repentence. As you have already encouraged us, Sudsy, may we extend acts of compassion in the name of our Savior - especially at this time of year.  |
|
|
|
| gay lynn voth Member Joined Jan 25, 2005 693 posts |
| Is this an exception or the rule? |
Posted Dec 14, 2009; 7:55 pm |
|
Sudsy wrote: | Quote: | | I would say, yes, and an example of this is the story of Ananias and Sapphira. |
I was wondering, Sudsy, isn't this story of Ananias and Sapphira the exception and not the rule? There likely was more disobedience within the church communities than that of this one couple and yet this couple dies while others do not.
What do you think this exceptional case is all about? |
|
|
|
| westcoast frame of mind Moderator |
| |
Posted Dec 14, 2009; 7:59 pm |
|
Gay Lynn (I'm trying to stay within the narrative so far w/out jumping ahead in the story).
I’m responding to what may be an uneven depiction of God’s character as it is revealed in his ‘wrath’ up to this point in our guided tour through the biblical narratives. (note: I may not be reading your posts a closely as you may wish. If I am beg u cut me some slack I still have Christmas shopping to do and am at the end of a busy day).
It would be helpful to know what critical response #1 you are responding to.
I like what you’ve said here….
| Quote: | | My reflections are dealing with whether God 'kills' or destroys evil from an irrational violence that is often linked to 'wrath' or whether God destroys evil based on God's absolute fairness and justice (which includes vengenence). The ultimate judgments of 'good and evil' are reserved exclusively for God. As we see in scripture, these judgments obviously include a sovereign power to destroy evil and favor good. |
It seems you are responding to the idea of God’s ‘irrational’ violence. Again, without knowing the author or context it’s hard to know what the notion of irrational comes from. From Reformed theology (deeply informed by NT Paul) we have God’s wrath and sinners = enemies in the hands of an angry God.
But looking at the Fall – death for an apple seems a bit much (if I can be so bold). And the Ex 4.24ff text remains bewildering to me. Are we not reading into a text which is silent about why God is coming intent to kill? We assume neglected circumcision. But, depending on our view of God this neglect may cause God’s irrational wrath, justified wrath at disobedience or God’s fair judgment (either way it seems a bit unfair to me). At this stage in the narrative our view seems either informed by other biblical material or presuppositional (perhaps both).
I hope this makes sense. It seems to me I’d like to get the starting point of the journey figured out. |
|
|
|
| gay lynn voth Member Joined Jan 25, 2005 693 posts |
| |
Posted Dec 15, 2009; 1:10 am |
|
Westcoast asked: | Quote: | | It seems you are responding to the idea of God’s ‘irrational’ violence. Again, without knowing the author or context it’s hard to know what the notion of irrational comes from. |
The notion of 'irrational' anger or wrath comes from discussions within the field of OT theology. The thought is sometimes expressed that in obscure OT narratives (like Ex. 4:24-26, for example) God seems to be working from a point of view we don't clearly understand. The term 'rirrational' is used to indicate that angry people often don't act 'rationally' - sensibly, reasonably, in a understandable way. The quote I was objecting to was taken from "Must There Be Scapegoats: Violence and Redemption in the Bible" written by theologian Raymund Schwager (S. J.).
Since I agreed with much of what Schwager said in this book, I did not provide his name since I was simply highlighting this quote as a point of view I hear expressed in theological writings. (For this quote -see forum entries above)
Schwager is arguing that the God of the OT is not a God of violence. In the Hebrew Bbile there is a gradual revelation of God's rejection of violence, sacrifices and holocausts. Schwager argues that this revelation is rejected by the leaders of the people. The teaching of Jesus is seen as God's final message denouncing the use of violence in association with religious practice and ritual.
In general what I am trying to do is follow the narrative in the OT as closely as I can, looking at the relationship between God and humanity in particular biblical events - to see what unfolds. I am interacting with a wide host of OT theologians. And yes, I am testing the theological hypothesis of an "angry God" put forward by Jonathon Edwards and others as I use this method. Like I said in an earlier post, the 'wrath' of God is not referenced directly in the book of Genesis. At this starting point for the revelation of God, wrath is not mentioned at the time of the original sins (and the term "curse" is not used for humankind). Even when God is seen to flood the earth as a means of ridding the world of human evil and violence, God is not referenced as 'angry' or wrathful.
I am beginning to think that this is too big an undertaking to be sharing in this format. I don't feel comfortable continuing so I will briefly conclude with a few thoughts from some OT theologians.
An OT theologian like Walther Eichrodt relates the 'wrath' of God with God's covenant lovingkindness, where God's holiness reaches its deepest meaning in the power of love which suffers for the sake of the condemned, until God has achieved his salvation. The ultimate secret of God's divine personhood is manifested in 'love concealed in wrath'. This mystery is revealed to the one who by faith can see God breaking into this present aeon of God's new world.
OT theologian John L. McKenzie sees that theology is also a theodicy. What emerges in the OT is not a rational system but a basic personal reality - Yahweh - who is consistent as a person, and not as a rational system. So when God acts in an obscure way in Exodus 4:24-26, this piece or fragment of God-talk can be 'reconciiled', but not necessarily synthesized, by looking at the totality of the experience of who God is revealed to be in the scriptures.
Other OT theologians draw attention to the idea that (as we see when we come to the book of Job - after Deuteronomy) human suffering does not always occur as a curse or punishment. There is more going on in the relationship of God to the evil we experience.
Eating of the 'knowledge of good and evil' leads 'naturally' to the experience of evil which leads to fear, shame, violence, death and so forth. God is seen by some OT theologians (like Walter Brueggemann) to be embracing pain by entering into relationship with the violence of our human existence.
For example, at the time of the flood, we hear that God was pained and grieved by the evil and violence in the world. God is not condoning human violence is this act of annihilation - God is responding out of pain. This embrace of pain opens up to the NT where we see God, appearing in human flesh, to take upon hismself the pain of the 'sins of the world' in a God-initiated act of atonement and reconciliation.
OT theologian Claus Westermann goes so far as to state: Because Christ died on the cross even for his enemies, the charge of the pious against their enemies is dismissed. The saving of the faithful no longer implies death for nonbelievers. This also removes the curse from the suffering of believers. Human suffering can acquire a positive meaning through the suffering of Christ.
Westermann goes on to say that the “yes” to the OT from the perspective of Christ, and the “no” to the OT from the perspective of Christ, are not dogmatic and not theoretical. They are historical. One cannot say that what the NT says about God is correct, and what the OT says false . That part of what the OT says about God which has come to an end is done away with by the historical event of the coming of Christ as God’s final word and final act.
On a personal note, I am going to continue this project privately because I think the dramatic reconciling event of the atonement will stand out in sharp relief as it appears after the pain and frustration concerning evil ss expressed by the minor prophets at the close of the OT.
Last edited by gay lynn voth on Dec 15, 2009; 10:57 am; edited 6 times in total. |
|
|
|
| Sudsy Member Joined Sep 23, 2003 2833 posts |
| |
Posted Dec 15, 2009; 10:38 am |
|
| Quote: | | Hi Sudsy ... I whole heartedly agree that God can kill. I haven't suggested that God would not be able to do so, have I? Question I didn't mean to leave that impression. |
No, I was just adding an example to the point WCFOM was making that God can kill. Perhaps another example is found in the text about those who take communion in an unworthy manner as it says that they bring judgment on themselves and a number sleep. 1 Cor. 11:30. One point I get from this is that we should not judge others but concentrate on judging ourselves and correcting to avoid divine judgments.
| Quote: | | I was wondering, Sudsy, isn't this story of Ananias and Sapphira the exception and not the rule? There likely was more disobedience within the church communities than that of this one couple and yet this couple dies while others do not. |
Yes, I agree it was the exception and I believe this reflects how long suffering God is with us in our sinning when at any time He could chose to remove us from this earth but instead He is ready to forgive and gives us many chances as He did with Israel in the OT.
| Quote: | | What do you think this exceptional case is all about? |
Not sure, but it seems God is making a point to not take God lightly and in verse Acts 5:11 that 'great fear seized the whole church'. I personally believe that, if A&S were true believers that although they paid a severe consequence for a specific sin, that they will remain as Kingdom people. I see this as being a message to believers to not think that God will overlook our sin just because all our sins have been forgiven. Normally, God disciplines His children and gives us many chances to correct our mistakes. But we should not abuse God's loving kindness by our sinning. I wonder sometimes if the lack of physical healings today is a way that God is judging us. Not to say that the one sick is the one sinning but rather that because we have so much unrepentant sin within Christianity, God is perhaps not willing to physically heal under these conditions. And of course, there are exceptions as He does miraculously heal some.
| Quote: | | My reflections are dealing with whether God 'kills' or destroys evil from an irrational violence that is often linked to 'wrath' or whether God destroys evil based on God's absolute fairness and justice (which includes vengenence). |
I agree with the latter. I don't see God as irrational about anything. We are the one's that lack an understanding of God's rational in various areas.
| Quote: | | I am trying to point out that the Goodness of God in scripture includes caring for humankind, rebuking us, exhorting us to do good, covering our shame, forgiving our sins, removing our guilt as 'far as the east is from the west', delivering us from the oppression of evil, healing us from all kinds of dis-ease and terror, and resurrecting us from death for eternal life. |
And I agree and believe this is why I think the Gospel means 'good news'. It is mainly about God's goodness toward us. This does not mean we ignore the consequences identified with choosing to sin and I think Jesus was a hellfire preacher for those religious people who had hardened hearts and needed to see where these attitudes would eventually take them. But for others, I believe His message was very much focused on having abundant and eternal life.
To me, the word 'wrath' appears to be someone who just gets so angry that they cannot control the hate inside. But I believe God is never out of control and how He expresses His disgust for evil is always right and it is our problem trying to understand all His ways. As much as we want to have understandings about God that we can rationalize and I think we should attempt to, we must ultimately admit His ways and thoughts are beyond our ways and thoughts when we can't rationalize His acts at times. I have to agree with John L. McKenzie that God is not a rational system but a basic personal reality.
I appreciate this study as I am also discussing hellfire preaching on another forum and it ties in with an understanding of God's wrath. |
|
|
|
| gay lynn voth Member Joined Jan 25, 2005 693 posts |
| |
Posted Dec 15, 2009; 11:06 am |
|
Sudsy wrote: | Quote: | | I see this as being a message to believers to not think that God will overlook our sin just because all our sins have been forgiven. Normally, God disciplines His children and gives us many chances to correct our mistakes. But we should not abuse God's loving kindness by our sinning. |
I appreciated this view, Sudsy. It corresponds to how many OT theologians see the expression of God's anger in the OT. For example, the word "anger' is used first about God's emotions in relationship to Moses objections to God. God is said to be upset with Moses because Moses would not trust God to make him strong in his weakness.
Sudsy also wrote: | Quote: | To me, the word 'wrath' appears to be someone who just gets so angry that they cannot control the hate inside. But I believe God is never out of control and how He expresses His disgust for evil is always right and it is our problem trying to understand all His ways. As much as we want to have understandings about God that we can rationalize and I think we should attempt to, we must ultimately admit His ways and thoughts are beyond our ways and thoughts when we can't rationalize His acts at times. I have to agree with John L. McKenzie that God is not a rational system but a basic personal reality.
|
This is what I see as well. The 'personhood' of God is revealed in scripture. Theology cannot simply be a list of propositions linked and limited to a rationalized system. |
|
|
|
| westcoast frame of mind Moderator |
| |
Posted Dec 16, 2009; 9:47 am |
|
Gay Lynn,
I can understand why you would want to continue this project ‘off line’ without us on the sidelines interrupting with questions. 
Perhaps when you are finished you can share some thoughts.
Blessings; I’ve appreciated these posts. |
|
|
|
| gay lynn voth Member Joined Jan 25, 2005 693 posts |
| the Lord laid on him the iniquity of us all |
Posted May 1, 2010; 12:00 am |
|
Isaiah 53:6 ff is a good and faithful statement of what God accomplished in the sacrificial death of Jesus Christ on a criminal's cross. What does this tell us about the character of God?
"All we like sheep have gone astray; we have all turned to our own way, and the LORD has laid on him the iniquity of us all. He was oppressed and he was afflicted, yet he did not open his mouth; like a lamb that is led to the slaughter, and like a sheep that before its shearers is silent, so he did not open his mouth. By a perversion of justice he was taken away, Who could have imagined his future? For he was cut of from the land of the living, stricken for the transgression of my people They made his grave with the wicked and his tomb with the rich, although he had done no violence, and there was no deceit in his mouth.
Yet it was the will of the LORD to crush him with pain. When you make his life an offering for sin, he shall see his offspring, and shall prolong his days; through him the will of the LORD shall prosper. The righteous one, my servant, shall make many righteous, and he shall bear their iniquities. Therefore I will allot him a portion with the great, and he shall divide the spoil with the strong; because he poured out himself to death, and was numbered with the transgressors; Yet he bore the sin of many, and made intercession for the transgressors."
Earlier Isaiah 53:4-6 introduces the meaning and purpose of the suffering Servant of God as uniquely different from our account of it all: Surely he bore our iniquities and carried our diseases; YET we accounted him stricken, struck down by God, and afflicted BUT he was wounded for our transgressions, crushed for our iniquities; upon him was the punishment that made us whole and by his bruises we are healed."
Christ's death on the cross was violent and oppressive. The cross was a place of affliction and slaughter. A 'perversion of justice' caused him to be led away to be judged a criminal - a transgressor. On the cross, Christ was wounded, crushed and stricken, even though he had done 'no violence' nor spoken deceitfully about any matters.
So why this violence? Was this a punitive act of God's wrath or a sacrificial act of God's love?
Did some who observed this violent death consider that Christ was struck down or punished by God for his own wrongdoing? Yes - we are told - some did think this but they had it wrong. The truth of the matter was that Christ had done nothing wrong - He was not dying for his own sins. Christ was dying for OUR sins because he loved us. He was dying so he could see us - his offspring- live and prosper through his righteousness. It was the will of God that Christ should suffer and die FOR US. God knew that only the righteous One could cover the sins of the many unrighteous. God came in flesh - as the only begotten Son - to die a violent death as the abiding sacrificial Lamb - to make atonement for the sins of the world. Glory be to God the Father and the Son.
It was the will of God to make the suffering Servant - his only begotten Son - a sacrificial love offering for the world.
It was the will of God that Christ suffer and die - not for his own wrongdoing - but for the transgressions of many.
It was the will of God for Christ to bear the sins of many -
It was the will of God for Christ to make intercession for 'transgressors'.
God willed this death so we - the sheep of his pasture who had gone astray -could be delivered, healed, forgiven, made whole and be 'made righteous'.
What an awesome gift God gave on the cross. The apostle John communicates the character of God - the motivation of God's willingness to offer his Son: "For God so loved the world, that God gave his only begotten Son, that whosoever believes in him may not perish but may have eternal life. Indeed, God did not send the Son into the world to condemn the world, but in order that the world might be saved through him." John 3:16-17
The world in darkness lay, steeped in violence and sin ...
but into the darkness the Light has come -
to take upon himself the suffering of the world.
God willed it so to set us free from the bondages of evil, hatred and death.
God offered up the Lamb of God - to be an offering for the sins of the world -
so that all the sheep who had gone astray can hear the voice of the Shepherd.
And for those who do not love the darkness
but are willing to come to Light
to have their deeds exposed and clearly seen -
the healing balm is offered -
forgiveness of sins is granted -
burdens are lifted.
It was - and is - the will of God to save.
It is the will of God to save us and deliver us from condemnation and death.
God saves through the gift of Jesus Christ - the Light and Life of God.
There is no other name by which we can be saved. God willed it so. Glory be to God for willing our redemption.
Thanks be to God for the forgiveness of sins through the intercessory work of our Lord Jesus Christ. |
|
|
|
| Sudsy Member Joined Sep 23, 2003 2833 posts |
| |
Posted May 1, 2010; 10:49 am |
|
Amen !!! I further believe God so wants the world to be saved that He will make it possible that everyone has a fair opportuntity to receive the gift of eternal salvation through Christ Jesus. I just read a book where Jesus response to someone who had never heard the Gospel was 'too bad but there is nothing I can do about them spending eternity in hell's torment'.
I would not stick my neck out to say just how God leaves no one without excuse but I believe He truly is willing that none should perish. Whether this involves some opportunity through reincarnation or some chance beyond the grave for those who have never heard or however, I have trouble understanding a God of love that would have a 'too bad for you' attitude with people who never heard, perhaps because I never told them. And to say God selects some of us to be saved and others to be dammed, is a hard one to swallow also.
I'm just saying that there are further views about who God is within Christianity that continues to puzzle me. It seems there is some very non-caring beliefs regarding the final state of many, perhaps most people. O well, thats another topic.
I especially love the John 3:16 verse that begins 'God so loved that He'. This, to me, is the main motivation for the sacrificial act of Christ dying for us. |
|
|
|
| gay lynn voth Member Joined Jan 25, 2005 693 posts |
| |
Posted May 1, 2010; 1:04 pm |
|
I heartily agree with you Sudsy : | Quote: | | I especially love the John 3:16 verse that begins 'God so loved that He'. This, to me, is the main motivation for the sacrificial act of Christ dying for us. |
Seeing God's love as the motivation for Christ's death provides a living picture of God's character:
You have heard it said, 'You shall love your neighbor and hate your enemy.' But I say to you, Love your enemies and pray for those who persecute you, so that you may be children of your Father in heaven; for he makes his sun to rise on the evil and on the good, and sends rain on the righteous and the unrighteous. For you love those who love you, what reward do you have? Do not even the tax collectors do the same? And if you greet only your brothers and sisters, what more are you doing than others? Do not even the Gentiles do the same? Be perfect, therefore, as your heavenly Father is perfect. Matt. 5 :43-38 |
|
|
|
| lornewel Member Joined May 11, 2004 553 posts Location: Abbotsford |
| |
Posted May 2, 2010; 9:15 am |
|
Yes, scripture reveals the nature of God - a sovereign God who chooses according to his own desires in ways that I cannot fathom.
Romans 9 Not only that, but Rebekah's children had one and the same father, our father Isaac. 11Yet, before the twins were born or had done anything good or bad—in order that God's purpose in election might stand: 12not by works but by him who calls—she was told, "The older will serve the younger." 13Just as it is written: "Jacob I loved, but Esau I hated."
14What then shall we say? Is God unjust? Not at all! 15For he says to Moses,
"I will have mercy on whom I have mercy,
and I will have compassion on whom I have compassion."[f] 16It does not, therefore, depend on man's desire or effort, but on God's mercy. 17For the Scripture says to Pharaoh: "I raised you up for this very purpose, that I might display my power in you and that my name might be proclaimed in all the earth."[g] 18Therefore God has mercy on whom he wants to have mercy, and he hardens whom he wants to harden.
19One of you will say to me: "Then why does God still blame us? For who resists his will?" 20But who are you, O man, to talk back to God? "Shall what is formed say to him who formed it, 'Why did you make me like this?' "[h] 21Does not the potter have the right to make out of the same lump of clay some pottery for noble purposes and some for common use?
Eph 1:4-5 For he chose us in him before the creation of the world to be holy and blameless in his sight. In love 5he[c] predestined us to be adopted as his sons through Jesus Christ, in accordance with his pleasure and will (emphasis added)
Do I think it is "fair" that God chose some before the creation of the world and not others? It is very hard to swallow that in my world of tolerance and equity. But (a) I believe the scriptures and (b) I don't have much of an answer to the argument that a creator can choose what and how he will create.
So, Sudsy and Gaylynn, does not scripture (and our own experience) show us that all are sinners and deserving of the judgment of a holy God and a sentence of death? So if 100% of humankind remained condemned, God would be just and fair, right? Your argument seems to be that if God choses in his mercy and grace for no good reason given him by any person, to save even one, then he is obliged to save all. I don't think the sovereign God, the King of the universe is obliged to do anything except what he chooses to do. Nevertheless, in his mercy, not because he is obliged, he has reveled himself to all so that all humans are without excuse. Romans 1:18-20 |
|
|
|
| Sudsy Member Joined Sep 23, 2003 2833 posts |
| |
Posted May 2, 2010; 12:20 pm |
|
| Quote: | | Your argument seems to be that if God choses in his mercy and grace for no good reason given him by any person, to save even one, then he is obliged to save all. |
No, I personally do not believe God is obligated to save all but He is willing that none should perish and therefore, 'whosoever will' means all will be given a chance. I don't fully understand how God gives everyone a chance to believe in Christ according to Romans 1:18-20 and I think many who do not believe in Christ believe in one God as seen in nature. There are many scriptures that indicate that knowing and believing in Christ is required for salvation. And I don't want to get into a discussion on election and what it means to be 'chosen' as this has been kicked around for centuries. I chose to believe in a form of free will and that whosoever means whosoever and that God is seeking to save (shows mercy) to all yet He knows those who will not accept His gift of salvation. I would say though that the love of God is such that this attribute obligated Him to make a way of escape for all of us. In some sense God is obligated to Himself to be who He is. |
|
|
|
| lornewel Member Joined May 11, 2004 553 posts Location: Abbotsford |
| |
Posted May 2, 2010; 11:36 pm |
|
John 6 37All that the Father gives me will come to me, and whoever comes to me I will never drive away. 38For I have come down from heaven not to do my will but to do the will of him who sent me. 39And this is the will of him who sent me, that I shall lose none of all that he has given me, but raise them up at the last day. 40For my Father's will is that everyone who looks to the Son and believes in him shall have eternal life, and I will raise him up at the last day."
44"No one can come to me unless the Father who sent me draws him, and I will raise him up at the last day.
Does the Father draw everyone to Jesus? Does he "give" everyone to Jesus? Are there none who were chosen from before the foundation of the world who will be saved and others who will not? Does the Bible say "whosoever will?" I know it says "whosoever believeth", but only those the Father draws will believe. |
|
|
|
| gay lynn voth Member Joined Jan 25, 2005 693 posts |
| |
Posted May 3, 2010; 9:47 am |
|
I am not sure what I wrote above that prompted Lorne to write: | Quote: | | Your argument seems to be that if God choses in his mercy and grace for no good reason given him by any person, to save even one, then he is obliged to save all. |
Lorne, could you spell out for me in more detail how Isaiah 53 leads to the understanding that God is obliged to save everyone? I was simply referring to the fact that in Christ, God came to save any who would seek him, regardless of whether they were Jew or Gentile, male or female, rich or poor, slave or free, etc. I was not trying to suggest that God was obliged to save everyone. The only obligation I see in these verses is that we - all of us as human beings - should be willing (or obliged) to give thanks and worship God for the great gift of salvation accomplished through the birth, death and resurrection of Jesus Christ.
See John 10:1-22 and Hebrews 3 for some further discussion. |
|
|
|
| Neto Member Joined Feb 2, 2005 254 posts Location: Holmes County, Ohio |
| |
Posted May 3, 2010; 10:57 am |
|
| Sudsy wrote: | I ... believe God so wants the world to be saved that He will make it possible that everyone has a fair opportuntity to receive the gift of eternal salvation through Christ Jesus. I just read a book where Jesus response to someone who had never heard the Gospel was 'too bad but there is nothing I can do about them spending eternity in hell's torment'.
I would not stick my neck out to say just how God leaves no one without excuse but I believe He truly is willing that none should perish. Whether this involves some opportunity through reincarnation or some chance beyond the grave for those who have never heard or however, I have trouble understanding a God of love that would have a 'too bad for you' attitude with people who never heard, perhaps because I never told them. |
Sudsy,
I have felt this tension as well – One of the men of the tribe where we lived died before I knew enough of the language to explain the Gospel to him. I cried more then than when I got word that my grandmother passed away. (Happened while we were in the village. Actually, both of my grandmothers died while we were in the village – the one I didn’t know about until some weeks later.) Did I get there too late? Or had he heard and understood enough in the trade language that he “had his chance”? (He didn’t speak it well at all.) Another tribe was wiped out some 75 - 100 years ago (by the tribe we lived with). Were they so wicked (they were cannibals) that they, like the nations in the land to be inherited by the people of Israel, had “filled up their cup of wickedness”? |
|
|
|
|
|
