Innocents in Hell, Guilty in Heaven?

Lizard Breath writes:

quote:

---

I know that if I lived a Mother Theresa type of beautiful life

---

Mother Theresa was not a beautiful person. She was obsessed with fame and maintaining a holier-than-thou attitude. She exploited the suffering of others to advance her career. She actually hindered the ability of her organization to battle poverty.So if you lived a life like MT, winding up in hell isn't exactly such a surprise if the criteria is being a good person.------------------
Rrhain
WWJD? JWRTFM!

I apologise for jumping in on this thread. Before reading it all the way through I came across Brian's message, which I just had to reply to. If the Bible is God's Word then it must contain His moral standards. Here's an example: Is this a particularly low moral standard? No-one I know has been able to equal it.

Hi, Here are some more examples:1 Chronicles 13:9-10 And when they came unto the threshing floor of Childon, Uzza put forth his hand to hold the Ark, for the oxen stumbled. And the anger of the Lord was kindled against Uzza, and he smote him, because he put his hand to the ark: and there he died before God.Uzza touches a box and God kills him, what an evil man Uzza was and really did deserve to die for stopping the Ark falling.Exodus 11:10 And Moses and Aaron did all these wonders before Pharaoh: and the LORD hardened Pharaoh's heart, so that he would not let the children of Israel go out of his land.God makes sure that Pharaoh cannot let the Israelites go until God has had a chance to show his divine muscle. God likes to show off, and is particularly adept at slaughtering innocent children.1 Samuel 15:3 Now go and smite Amalek, and utterly destroy all that they have, and spare them not; but slay both man and woman, infant and suckling, ox and sheep, camel and ass.Love your enemies, do good to those who hate you!Numbers 31:17-18 Now therefore kill every male among the little ones, and kill every woman that hath known man by lying with him. But all the women children that have not known a man by lying with him, keep alive for yourselves.Keep the virgins for yourselves, there is a thread already about this promotion of child sexual abuse.I am not going to catalogue the plethora of horrific atrocities that God has inflicted upon mankind. The God of the Bible is a barbarian, nothing more, nothing less, if you want to worship a bloodthirsty tyrant then feel free, I cannot bring myself to fall back into this world of self delusion. Very commendable, but what is the punishment for adultery, surely there must be a punishment for breaking the Law?It appears there is a penalty to pay for adultery:Leviticus 20:10 " 'If a man commits adultery with another man's wife-with the wife of his neighbour-both the adulterer and the adulteress must be put to death.Very nice, very civilised, a man who is married and appreciates the beauty of a woman that he isn’t married to should be stoned to death. The complete stupidity of this Bible teaching is apparent when you consider what should happen to the innocent woman who has no idea that she is part of this ‘adultery’, should she be stoned to death as well, or can you commit ‘adultery’ by yourself? I think your God speaks with forked tongue. If your god says this then he needs to practice what he preaches, God is a bad example to others.Almost all religions have a Golden Rule that promotes a similar attitude towards others, most are far older than Xianity.There are some here: Golden RuleWell read a bit more about other world faiths and you will see that this type of teaching was around long before xian scribes copied it.Brian.

Okay, let's start things up.

quote:

---

No. Romans 2:11 says "For there is no respect of persons with God." That means that God never respects one person over another, or plays favorites.

---

Then I have to ask how you would reconcile this passage with the fact that some people, by benefit of having been taught Christianity from birth, clearly have a leg up as far as Christian salvation goes.It's a difficult road to say that something is not the case because God says it isn't. In this case, his actions would seem to contradict his words.

quote:

---

However, God, being the Creator of all existence and the only omnipotent and omniscient One, is able to act in ways that I, a created being, do not understand, nor can I explain. Please note that I dealt with this quote first rather than last to specifically avoid the idea that I am washing away reason with "only God knows". However, it is a fact and a statement of scripture:
"For as the heavens are higher than the earth, so are my ways higher than
your ways, and my thoughts than your thoughts." Isaiah 55:9

---

For the purposes of this conversation though, I think we do have to stick to the reasoning capacity of humans. God may well understand it all in heaven, but we still have to deal with it on Earth.

quote:

---

There is a common assumption that unless some person of European descent goes to a foreign country with a Bible in hand, that country is "without hope" from a Christian perspective. Let me begin by assuring you the Bible never suggests at any such idea. Instead, it states repeatedly that God has been revealing Himself to mankind since the beginning of creation.

---

The issue, however, is not one of knowing God. If that were the case, then any religion at all would get you into heaven, wouldn't it? The problem is one of worshipping God in the correct way.As I understand it, and please correct me if I'm wrong, a major tenet of Christianity is the idea that one must accept Christ, and appreciate his sacrifice on the cross in order to reach heaven. The sacrifice of Christ is not something that can be gleaned by examining nature, and contemplating God's work. If it was, why would the sacrifice (and its subsequent preaching) have had to take place at all? Wouldn't mere contemplation of the world be enough?The specific ritual of baptism would seem to be required as well. How can original sin be washed away if the story of Genesis is unknown?

quote:

---

If God is so omnipotent that He can reveal Himself in such an absolute way to people, why is the entire world not Christian? The answer is human choice.

---

But where is the choice, if the options are unknown?Imagine I invite you over for dinner, and I phone you up ahead of time and say, "We have hamburgers for dinner. Sound good?" You say okay, and you come over. When you arrive, I drop a moldy, maggot-infested hamburger on your plate, lean in real close, and say "you chose poorly."Would it have killed me to tell you that the hamburger was moldy, and that I had perfectly good chicken in the fridge? A choice without all the facts isn't much of a choice at all.Let me elaborate on the skywriting metaphor you presented. Yes, skywriting in spanish over Mexico would certainly seem to be how God has communicated with those who have read the Bible. But to those who have not had access to the specific facts contained within, it's like living in China and being told, "what?!?! I wrote huge letters all over the skies in Mexico! Excuse me if you didn't see 'em!"

quote:

---

The question raised here is can invisible things lead a person to knowledge of Christ? The answer is an absolute yes. I can say this with authority because the pinnacle of God’s act of revealing Himself to mankind took place when He came to the earth as Jesus Christ.

---

You might need to slow me down and walk through this one again, Russ. The life of Jesus Christ is not an invisible thing; it is, if accepted as divine, a concrete display of God's desires.This might well be the crux of our disagreement. How is it possible for a person to come to specific knowledge of Christ's sacrifice without being told about his life, or even that he existed? Not a general knowledge of God, as is promised in Romans, but the specific information required for admission to heaven?[This message has been edited by Dan Carroll, 12-03-2003]

I apologize for the long delay in posting. I have been hit by finals week somewhat unprepared. I am determined to post this week (somehow). Again, sorry for the delay.Russ

That's cool. Real world stuff should always take precedence over the internet.

To all,I would like to apologize for my delayed response. I have given Dan's post much thought over the past couple of days. I could have responded earlier, I simply let some things get in the way. But now I would like to respond to the question that Dan raised because I think it is very relevant to the discussion. I realize that he raised more than one questions. However, Dan, what you are asking, and I hope I can demonstrate this clearly, is really concerning a singular issue.To begin, let me address the "some people have a leg up" reply to my comment from Romans 2:11. It does seem that there is some advantage to the American or person of other nationality who lives in a country where "christian" churches abound. Yet this is, in truth, a misconception. The error takes place on the most basic level of understanding and finds its root in a sort of humanistic elitism. The thought is that God has been good to some and not good to others. This, however, violates the very character of God as well as the design He has put in place for all of His creation. Now I am going to seem to change tracks, but I am really just shifting gears and still dealing with the one thought.Dan, you commented on getting to Heaven and suggested that the issue is worshipping God the right way. You also seemed to think that baptism is a requirement to wash away original sin. I want to tell you that both of these ideas are not consistent with the scriptures because they promote religion. The basic commonality between all religions is a system of works that will provide some redemption of the human soul. This can not logically be associated with the Bible because the scriptures are very clear that there is no kind of work a man can do to redeem himself from a sinful state. Looking again at our agreed context, it is clear that humanity finds itself to be sinners. There is a clear list of sinful behavior in Romans 1:29-32. And this list is not what makes a person sin-filled. Rather, these are 25 things set forth as an example of the behavior of a person who is dwelling in sin. So these specific sins do not make a person a sinner. Instead they are the sinful outworking of the iniquity that is already in their soul.So what then is that one issue which is the very nucleus of a life of faith? It is knowing Him who is the source of faith, the only true God who is the Creator and LORD of all. Could, then, any religion get you into heaven? No. It has already been stated that a system of works will never be sufficient, no matter how seemingly righteous it is. Furthermore, the god that religions know and equate to the only true God and Father of the LORD Jesus Christ is not the same as the God of Heaven. Their god and the God are not in agreeance in the most basic elements of character. Even further removed is the suggested design for life by their god and that which is given by the God of the Bible. Again, I will point to our context of Romans 1:16-3 as a proof text, and if I may I would also like to include verses 1-7 of the same chapter.Now to deal with the whole ball of twine let me begin by saying you are right when you say the sacrifice of Christ is something that must be known. God, who, again, desires to have all people know Him with an intense desire that could not be described with any words that would do it justice, has done everything possible to ensure a knowledge of Jesus Christ is ultimately available to all. I must stress here that no person in creation ever went to hell without having an adequate opportunity to respond to God first. And while the initial point you raised in post #34 seems to be valid, it is based on one of two unscriptural ideas.The first, and the point of invalidation, is that God presents Himself to everyone in the exact same manner in regards to situational specifics. This is untrue and clearly declared to be so in the Bible. The LORD has designed every human being as a specific individual and uses what is necessary to reach them. This always begins with the knowledge of His design over creation. If this is accepted and believed, He then provides more truth of Himself to lead that person to the culmination of revelation, which is the very person of Jesus Christ.The second erroneous idea is that God has decided for Himself who will get to Heaven and who will not, and then proceeds to place people in proximity to or distant from the gospel. To say this is elitism and a putrid idea wholly unsupported by the bible is understating the matter. This line of thinking is called Calvinism, and while it is somewhat relevant to the discussion, I would prefer to not see the discussion turned off on this point simply because it will ultimately detract from the main issue.I would like to begin my conclusion with a question that you asked me. This is the answer(and please understand that any seeming redundancy is for emphasis): From the first moment that Adam breathed the breath of God and became a living soul, the LORD has sought to bring all people into a deeply intimate knowledge of Himself as Creator. This began with the foundational revelation of His design in all of creation, which revelation is available for acceptance to all people at all times. Upon this revelation He dispensed subsequent revelation taking its form in dreams, visions, His own voice, heavenly messengers, the prophets of old, the law given to Moses and the Jews, and His mastery over every set of circumstances that exists. All of this outward expression of the person of God points to the same end. This end was clearly visible to the Jews and Gentiles in the Old Covenant and is to us also. That end is the finished work of God come to earth, Jesus Christ, who took on the very penalty for sin that separated humanity from Himself so that for all time the only barrier between God and man would be man's own will. Any acceptance of revelation from God will first lead to the knowledge of His existence, and second to the understanding that the individual in question is indeed a sinner needing to have his sins washed away.The only reason any person can attempt to suggest that they have no sin is because they have denied the very person of God. Furthermore, this does not actually ever take place because the conviction over sin that the Holy Spirit places on a person's heart is present in the hardest of unbelievers. Unfortunately, this conviction is ignored through self-justification, or removing God and calling it the conscience, or attempting to reason away the guilt all together. Conversely, when a person recognizes the existence of the Creator and LORD God, and agrees with Him they they are a sin-sick human needing forgiveness from Him alone who is able to grant it, then the LORD always sends specific knowledge of the finished work of Christ.I will close with a brief illustration which is an attempt to correct the burger analogy. Imagine that the LORD of Heaven and Earth came to you in physical form and presented to you a present in a box. He does not force you to take it but extends it for you to take from His hand. Although you do not know what the gift is, you must conclude it is a good gift because "God is light and in Him is no darkness at all." (I John 1:5) So then, accepting Him personally (because you did not run from Him when He approached you) and His gift (if you take it from His hand), you open the box to find adoption papers with your name at the top and the name of Jesus Christ signed at the bottom in blood (John 1:12). This is the truth. You do not deserve the gift but instead punishment for sin. But God, loving you more than you love yourself, "gave His only begotten son, that whosoever believeth in Him should not perish, but have everlasting life." (John 3:16)Russ

Apostlos,Thank you for your response, but I feel like you still haven't touched the issue at all: "How is it possible for a person to come to specific knowledge of Christ's sacrifice without being told about his life, or even that he existed?"You keep insisting that it's some sort of "humanistic elitism" to suggest that they're not on a level playing field. I am forced to ask again: What does God do to reveal himself, and why is it not reflected in the population?If God *has* revealed Christ to all of these people, where is the evidence? Are we to believe that hundreds of millions to billions of people all had Christ revealed to them, and all chose to reject him? And, are we also to believe that all sides were on a level playing field, but Europe ended up almost entirely Christian while the Americas didn't have a single Christian indian tribe, no matter how small? Can a level playing field even remotely reconcile such an imbalance? If so, how?Apart from Calvinism, I don't see a reconcilation of this issue from you at all.------------------
"Illuminant light,
illuminate me."

Now it's my turn to take a couple days. Sit tight, I'll be back with a response!

I already answered your first question in both of my posts. I also answered your second question in my most recent one. But for clarification let me say that if you will review both of my lengthy posts you will see that great multitudes of people had God revealed to them, not necessarily the specific person and work of Christ. This is due to the progressive revelation that God uses to reach all people. To answer you, let me say there are many books, like 'Peace Child' and 'Eternity In Their Hearts', which tell the story of tribes who had some understanding of God but their knowledge was not complete until one day (as if by coincedence but in truth by divine control) a missionary went to them only to find out that they had been waiting years to hear the truth of the Bible. There is a video called Ee-Tau (I think) which shows this exact thing happening. In addition to this, there is no evidence to suggest that they multitudes have never heard when the groups in question have perfectly followed the pattern God sets forth in Romans 1:16-32. In regards to Europe and America, just because people know the right words to say and say that they believe certain things does not in fact mean that they have accepted the person of Jesus Christ as savior. I tell you in truth that there very many people in this country fulfilling some kind of religious duty in the name of Christ who have never truly accepted the person of God and received salvation through Jesus Christ.So is the playing field level? Yes, absolutely. It only appears to not be so when you are standing with your head crooked in one direction or another instead of straight like it was designed to be for normal viewing, figuratively speaking of course.Russ
[edited to correct syntax error]A final note on Calvinism: It is an erroneous theological system supposed to be based on scripture. However, every proof text of the Calvinist is in fact a misrepresentation of that passage of scripture and of the character of God. If you think that I am amiss in my view, then please take up the matter with Dave Hunt or His book 'What Love Is This?'. I do not see further discussion of such an illogical system adding to this conversation and will have no further input on it.[This message has been edited by apostolos, 12-09-2003]

quote:

---

I already answered your first question in both of my posts. I also answered your second question in my most recent one. But for clarification let me say that if you will review both of my lengthy posts you will see that great multitudes of people had God revealed to them, not necessarily the specific person and work of Christ

---

Clearly you didn't answer the questions well enough or clear enough, or I would not have felt the need to ask you to restate.I'll ask you more directly: You seem to think that Christ is inherently revealed to native tribes. Can you name a single tribe that was *found already as Christian*, or any new world archaeological evidence to suggest that there ever was a tribe that was Christian before missionaries got there.. I don't care what happens after missionaries got there - we're talking about whether these people were being damned in the millenia before missionaries arrived.

quote:

---

In addition to this, there is no evidence to suggest that they multitudes have never heard when the groups in question have perfectly followed the pattern God sets forth in Romans 1:16-32.

---

We're not talking about a "pattern" - we're talking about specific rules and commands. We're talking about a monotheistic religous view with Jesus Christ as the savior (even if by another name) with specific proscriptions for belief, sexuality, gender roles, church service, and even style of dress. No native Americans had this.

quote:

---

. I tell you in truth that there very many people in this country fulfilling some kind of religious duty in the name of Christ who have never truly accepted the person of God and received salvation through Jesus Christ.

---

The 'No True Scotsman' fallacy.

Rei, The established context for this discussion is the book of Romans chapter 1, verses 16-32. In that passage it describes people who have rejected God and turned to what some call animism, which is the exact practice of the native indians present in America before the English got here. Also, if you are really seeking the answer to your questions, then I can tell you that I put forth information dealing with those specific points in both of my long posts. If I have failed to provide enough information in either post, then it is up to you to show me where my post is inadequate. You haven't done that yet, you have only repeated your questions. So again, I ask you to please review what has already been put forth or show me where I have not provided sufficient information.Russ

quote:

---

If I have failed to provide enough information in either post, then it is up to you to show me where my post is inadequate.

---

How can I do that apart from asking questions on where I need things clarified? What sort of a debate is it in which one person makes a "point" that is too vague to be understood, and when the other person asks for clarification, you simply tell them to read again?I'll enumerate the questions again. If you refuse to answer them, I'll considered them unanswered, and thus significant points against your worldview. I want a specific answer for each question.1. What does God do to reveal himself (specifics, please! No more generalizations).2. Can you name a single tribe that was *found already as Christian*, or any new world archaeological evidence to suggest that there ever was a tribe that was Christian before missionaries got there.. I don't care what happens after missionaries got there - we're talking about whether these people were being damned in the millenia before missionaries arrived.3. Do people go to heaven for a "pattern", or for belief in a specific set of rules and commands (a monotheistic religous view with Jesus Christ as the savior (even if by another name), with specific proscriptions for belief, sexuality, gender roles, church service, and even style of dress)? If the latter, can you name a *single* *specific* native tribe which managed this (something that innumerable Europeans did, even with your "No True Scotsman" fallacy)?------------------
"Illuminant light,
illuminate me."

I would respond to your 1st point that all men have the knowledge of God written on their hearts, regardless of whether anyone has spoken the gospel to them.Matt[This message has been edited by Matt Tucker, 12-10-2003]

God reveals himself in general revelation, or nature. There is an obvious order (which if i might add did not come about, as Gaylord Simpson said, by slight successive changes to an organism) in nature that reveals an orderly creator. therefore, there must be God.Matt