Did God design the best possible universe?

[12strings]

It would seem to question God's wisdom for his present actions is in reality questioning God for his CREATIVE DESIGN as his present actions are resultant.

I am not questioning God's wisdom, I think you are mis-reading what I'm saying, so i'm going to drop it.


Regarding those who have never heard, Dr. Walter is correct. They are not condemned for not believing in Jesus, but for their sin; God is just to do so. He would be just in condemning all of us. However, he sent Jesus as a propitiation "so that he might be just and the justifier of the one who has faith in Jesus. (rom 3:26)

 

[billwald]

>God's response for questioning his present actions seems to be a challenge for God's design in creation as He takes job back to creation:

God's responses boil down to "I can crush you like a bug."

 

[billwald]

>Bill, in your view what would constitute "opting out"?

Rejecting the good news and not choosing "life" after one understands the consequences of rejecting the opportunity to accept.

 

[12strings]

So should we stop telling people about Jesus, lest they hear and understand and reject him?

 

[Amy.G]

So should we stop telling people about Jesus, lest they hear and understand and reject him?

Not telling people about Jesus is disobedience to God. But according to Paul, God reveals Himself through creation so that no one has an excuse. And according to Jesus, if a man responds to the revelation of God that he has received, God will give him more. So for the man who has never heard of Jesus, yet he knows God the creator and worships Him, God will make a way for him to hear the gospel.

 

[12strings]

Not telling people about Jesus is disobedience to God. But according to Paul, God reveals Himself through creation so that no one has an excuse. And according to Jesus, if a man responds to the revelation of God that he has received, God will give him more. So for the man who has never heard of Jesus, yet he knows God the creator and worships Him, God will make a way for him to hear the gospel.

I agree with the bolded section above. Where exactly does Jesus say that when someone responds to a little revelation he will give more? This seems to be a very popular idea, I just wonder where it comes from?

 

[Dr. Walter]

I am not questioning God's wisdom, I think you are mis-reading what I'm saying, so i'm going to drop it.

Don't misunderstand me. I am not charging YOU with questioning God's wisdom. I am saying, that this kind of reasoning does question God's wisdom, whether it is by intention or simply inquisitive in nature.

 

[billwald]

>Originally Posted by 12strings
>So should we stop telling people about Jesus, lest they hear and understand and reject him?

NO! We tell people about Jesus so that the elect, the people whom the Holy Spirit has regenerated, will understand what has happened to them and convert.

Jesus has not returned thus there must be elect people in the world who are in need of conversion.

 

[12strings]

>Bill, in your view what would constitute "opting out"?

BILL SAID: Rejecting the good news and not choosing "life" after one understands the consequences of rejecting the opportunity to accept.

BILL SAID: NO! We tell people about Jesus so that the elect, the people whom the Holy Spirit has regenerated, will understand what has happened to them and convert.

Jesus has not returned thus there must be elect people in the world who are in need of conversion.

1. You are saying confusing things. If one is only lost after rejecting the good news, then why should we not withhold the good news so they are not lost. Are you saying those who have not heard are therefore not lost, and will be pardoned for never hearing?

2. Are you saying that there are certain people in the world, Elected by God to be regenerated, who are in fact now regenerated, but have not yet heard the gospel? ...and that They may have nieghbors and friends who are not regenerated, and so will not respond to the gospel anyway?

 

[12strings]

Don't misunderstand me. I am not charging YOU with questioning God's wisdom. I am saying, that this kind of reasoning does question God's wisdom, whether it is by intention or simply inquisitive in nature.

How does this fit with the idea that Creation was a "free" act of God. Are you saying God HAD to create the world he created? How does this fit with "The Lord is in the heavens, he does whatever he pleases" (Ps. 115:3). Could not God have created nothing at all?

 

[billwald]

1. You are saying confusing things. If one is only lost after rejecting the good news, then why should we not withhold the good news so they are not lost. Are you saying those who have not heard are therefore not lost, and will be pardoned for never hearing?

2. Are you saying that there are certain people in the world, Elected by God to be regenerated, who are in fact now regenerated, but have not yet heard the gospel? ...and that They may have nieghbors and friends who are not regenerated, and so will not respond to the gospel anyway?

Not exactly. The elect are regenerate and will "saved" in the next life. There are temporal benefits of conversion in this life which even the elect can reject. I think there is a final "rejecting" at the final judgement in the next life. Those who are not regenerate will choose to go to Hell. Why would a person who hated God, Jesus, and Christians all his life choose to live with for all eternity? For him, it would be a psychological hell.

 

[12strings]

Not exactly. The elect are regenerate and will "saved" in the next life. There are temporal benefits of conversion in this life which even the elect can reject. I think there is a final "rejecting" at the final judgement in the next life. Those who are not regenerate will choose to go to Hell. Why would a person who hated God, Jesus, and Christians all his life choose to live with for all eternity? For him, it would be a psychological hell.

3 questions:

-Do you attend a primitive baptist church?

-Is there any scripture that teaches this?

-Are you saying God does not "send" people to hell as the just punishment for their sin, but rather people send themselves there because they do not want to be where God is?

 

[billwald]

3 questions:

>-Do you attend a primitive baptist church?

Never.

>-Is there any scripture that teaches this?

I think it is implied but not implicitly stated.

>-Are you saying God does not "send" people to hell as the just punishment for their sin, but rather people send themselves there because they do not want to be where God is?

Yes. C. S. Lewis said it first in "The Great Divorce?"

 

[12strings]

Q: Are you saying God does not "send" people to hell as the just punishment for their sin, but rather people send themselves there because they do not want to be where God is?

A: Yes. C. S. Lewis said it first in "The Great Divorce?"

I appreciate CS Lewis as much as the next guy, but there is a real problem with basing our theology on things he, or anyone else says. I have, sadly, also heard Tim Keller make the same argument about people sending themselves to hell; and to make his point he quotes C.S. Lewis as if it has the same authority as scripture. Very sad, and confusing for listeners. For one, Even C.S. Lewis admits the great divorce is merely his imagination of how things might be. Be even then, the ideas put forward are very problematic, for 2 reasons:

1. If the elect are regerate already, and the gospel is only to help them in THIS LIFE, then you have to discount large portions of scripture that connect the gospel with eternal life & salvation.

2. If people are not condemned for their sins, that is, the wrath of God toward sin is NOT what sends people to hell; then it means that Christ's death wasn't really necessary. If there was no wrath to expiate, why come to die at all?

John 3:36 = Whoever believes in the Son has eternal life; whoever does not obey the Son shall not see life, but the wrath of God remains on him.