Featured Perspective

And my point is they DID. Your's is not a new objection.

But how could they trust in One in whom they did not believe? How could they believe in One they had never heard about? How can they hear about God if someone doesn’t preach about him? How are they going to be able to preach about Him if men are not being sent?

But I ask, “Didn’t they hear?”

The sound of their voices went out to all the earth. Their words went out to the farthest places in the world.

They are without excuse.

 

What I posted was Romans 10:14-18.

And I never said "they wouldn't believe anyway." The passage said that having opportunity they did not believe. You are free to reject (and Internet Theologian is free to disagree with) my reply, but just know it wasn't mine to begin with.

 

Is that how you understand the passage?

 

I am saying that faith comes from hearing and hearing through the word of Christ. But I ask, have they not heard? Indeed they have "Their voice has gone out to all the earth, and their words to the ends of the world."

Another way to put it is that God's invisible attributes, that is, His eternal power and divine nature, have been clearly perceived, ever since the creation of the world, in the things that have been made. So they are without excuse.

Everyone has had an opportunity, although granted maybe not the same opportunity. But all have rejected God. The tribal man who never heard of a Bible or saw a missionary bore witness to God's eternal power and divine nature. He heard. But he rejected what he heard. The Father and the Son are one. No one is unjustly condemned because all who are condemned have rejected the knowledge that God has granted. If you interpret the passage differently, then that is fine. I am not trying to change your mind. You are not my responsibility. You asked me to answer your questions. I did. Take it or leave it. That is your decision. And I respect that choice just as I expect you to respect mine. The question about those who have not heard the gospel, if they are justly condemned when no preacher has ever set foot on their door, was asked and answered twice in Scripture. Internet Theologian dislikes that passage and you do not seem to view it as applicable. But I do (mostly because it is the same question and the answer given is not mine).

 

Romans 10:13-18 (ESV)
For “everyone who calls on the name of the Lord will be saved.” How then will they call on him in whom they have not believed? And how are they to believe in him of whom they have never heard? And how are they to hear without someone preaching? And how are they to preach unless they are sent? As it is written, “How beautiful are the feet of those who preach the good news!”
But they have not all obeyed the gospel. For Isaiah says, “Lord, who has believed what he has heard from us?” So faith comes from hearing, and hearing through the word of Christ.

But I ask, have they not heard? Indeed they have, for “Their voice has gone out to all the earth, and their words to the ends of the world.”

Romans 1:19-21 (ESV)
For what can be known about God is plain to them, because God has shown it to them.For his invisible attributes, namely, his eternal power and divine nature, have been clearly perceived, ever since the creation of the world, in the things that have been made. So they are without excuse. For although they knew God, they did not honor him as God or give thanks to him, but they became futile in their thinking, and their foolish hearts were darkened.

 

In Romans 10:18 Paul is quoting from Psalm 19:4. to show that David also understood that God's General Revelation of Himself extended to all of mankind.

Take the word "words" in context and we see it is not the articulated Special Revelation of the Gospel but rather the General Revelation of God's existence, power, and majesty that is in view here so that they were without excuse.

 

So men are condemned

Because the objection that Paul is addressing is "How can they be justly condemned for rejecting what they have never heard?" The answer is that they are justly condemned for rejecting what they have heard.

What I am saying is that all men have had enough knowledge of God to reject God (to include rejecting Christ). The OT saints were saved the same way that we are, by faith in Christ. We all have an opportunity, but not the same opportunity. God's nature (Christ's nature)....their "name"...is revealed to all men and all men are justly condemned for rejecting God (it is impossible to sin without that sin being a rejection of God).

I know a man who was saved through study of Scripture at a bible college (the truths of scripture did not sink in until he had to settle down and study for a year). Does that mean that this man's brother, who was not saved, is somehow excused because he did not benefit from such a study? Condemnation is about rejecting God, and all have rejected God (all have sinned, they are "unrighteous").

 

We both think the othet makes errors here, which is why we discuss things.

I do believe that God is revealed through His creation, and also that God has made Himself known to man. And men are justly condemned for rejecting God.

It is not a critical error but different questions. If you ask how men who never heard of Christ be justly condemned (the answer to which you "infuriating"), then Paul gives that answer clearly. All have rejected Christ in terms of just condemnation.

But you are also asking how the gospel of Christ is revealed to those isolated people towards salvation. I can only say this, like Philip and the Ethiopian, God provides the way.

Sent from my TARDIS

 

Does Scripture say that what is revealed is a "general knowledge of a supreme being", or does it say that God Himself has made known his power and his nature in such a way that they are without excuse?

Salvation is specific, but it is not dependent on man. It is dependent on the will of God.

Sent from my TARDIS