Do Sinners go to hell due to rejection of Christ/Or Their Sin Natures?

[Skandelon]

Primary cause: they sinned
Secondary cause: rejection of Christ.


Example: Suppose I have to pay a speeding ticket. It's $150. Why do I have to pay the ticket? It's because I broke the law. Now, you come up and offer to pay the debt for me. I reject your offer. If I had accepted your offer, I would have had to pay the ticket and it would have been because I broke the law. Secondary causes don't remove the primary cause. So why do people go to hell? Because they are sinners who have rejected Christ with being a sinner as the primary reason.

If I may tweak your analogy just a bit to illustrate my point: Suppose you have to pay a huge fine you CANT pay so you are about to have to go to jail instead, but the judge's son pays the fine for you, so that NOTHING is owed, its paid in full. The judge looks to you and says, "Your debt has been paid, if you will simply apologize for your crime and thank my son for his provision, you can go." Either you graciously accept the offer and confess, or in rebellion you curse the judge and go to prison.

NOW... Why did you go to prison? Was it because of your debt? NO. The debt was paid in full. It was ONLY because of your refusal to met the provision put in by the judge...to repent. "They could not enter because of their unbelief."

 

[Skandelon]

the point here though is that NONE are without excuse, will be judged and condemned due to willful rejection of Christ..

IF you are not elected/chosen by the Lord, you still commit sins deserving punishment, and you will not have an excuse, since you are doing what is natural to you, what you would do , as God just leaves you to do what you want to do anyways as you do get to excercise your "free will" and stay lost, light has come into the World, yet men refused to receive, as chose to stay hidden in their darkness

The only problem with that view is that God has equally determined "what we want," by choosing to judge mankind for the sin of Adam by making us all born totally unable to willingly repent even in the face of God's appeal to be reconciled. That is biblically unfounded IMO.

 

[humblethinker]

The only problem with that view is that God has equally determined "what we want," by choosing to judge mankind for the sin of Adam by making us all born totally unable to willingly repent even in the face of God's appeal to be reconciled. That is biblically unfounded IMO.

Well said!

 

[Aaron]

The question being debated is this: Which act of sin condemns a man, and which one saves him?

The noncalvinists are saying that all men are already saved from their sins, and all they need is one act of righteousness, that of "accepting," to complete the process. This basically means that one is saved by his own work of righteousness, and the only thing Christ accomplished on the Cross was a levelling the playing field.

What a small, small view of the work of Christ—comtemptuous really. To say that Christ did not atone for an individual, but for an environment.

That is not the Gospel.

[Edited: the question should read: Which act of sin condemns a man, and which act of righteousness saves him?]

 

[JesusFan]

The only problem with that view is that God has equally determined "what we want," by choosing to judge mankind for the sin of Adam by making us all born totally unable to willingly repent even in the face of God's appeal to be reconciled. That is biblically unfounded IMO.

In your opinion, do both Cals who take it as being Limited atonement have the same "problem: here as those who believe in unlimited atonement?

 

[Iconoclast]

Well said!

Wrongly said!

Many have lived and died without hearing about Jesus. they are rightly and justly judged by God for their sins.

12That at that time ye were without Christ, being aliens from the commonwealth of Israel, and strangers from the covenants of promise, having no hope, and without God in the world

This is bible 101;
1]without Christ

2]aliens fromthe commonwealth of Israel

3]strangers from the covenants of promise

4] having no hope

5] and without God in the world

There will be no sin in heaven
All sinned and died in Adam
sinners who live long enough sin by experience also

 

[percho]

Maybe they slipped through a crack because the following did not take place.

For I will be merciful to their unrighteousness, and their sins and their iniquities will I remember no more.

Part of the new covenant.

 

[Skandelon]

In your opinion, do both Cals who take it as being Limited atonement have the same "problem: here as those who believe in unlimited atonement?

The problem may be less noticeable because it offends less of the biblical evidence, but the issue isn't avoided. Even if the Calvinist believes that the atonement is provided for and "genuinely" offered to all (even the non-elect), it doesn't remove the problem that God, by HIS own choice, judged all mankind to be born as enemies of God due to Adam's sin and totally unable to willingly repent in the face of God's "genuine" appeal to be reconciled.

1. How can that appeal be genuine?
2. How can the non-elect be held accountable for their divinely decreed response to that appeal?

 

[Skandelon]

Wrongly said!

Many have lived and died without hearing about Jesus. they are rightly and justly judged by God for their sins.

Can you say with certainty that all those who didn't hear about Jesus are condemned to Hell?

Did Rahab know of Jesus? Yet, was she not justified by faith?

The question regarding those who have never heard is another subject all together. It has been addressed before, but here is a link to an article that does a very good job describing a "non-Calvinistic" answer to this question...HERE>

 

[JesusFan]

Can you say with certainty that all those who didn't hear about Jesus are condemned to Hell?

Did Rahab know of Jesus? Yet, was she not justified by faith?
She was justified by her faith, believing what she was told by the spies, just as Abraham believed what God revealed to him, both of their faiths credited to their account by God...

Believe Paul addressed this when he said that until time of Christ comingm, God "overlooked" sins and trangressions, BUT NOW since Christ came and died on Cross, he commands sinner everywhere to repent and believe,,,

The question regarding those who have never heard is another subject all together. It has been addressed before, but here is a link to an article that does a very good job describing a "non-Calvinistic" answer to this question...HERE>

Know Cals would answer this by saying that those chosen out/elected by God will have the message reach them some means, and Giod will do the inwrd work to allow them to repent believe and receive him

Would Arms have to somehow appeal to God reconciling World thru Cross back to Himself , and thus almost like God has already forgave them in Christ, so they would have to "not chose" Jesus, and take themselves out of their reconciliation?

 

[Skandelon]

Would Arms have to somehow appeal to God reconciling World thru Cross back to Himself , and thus almost like God has already forgave them in Christ, so they would have to "not chose" Jesus, and take themselves out of their reconciliation?

I have no idea what you are asking. Sorry, but sometimes you leave out subjects, verbs or other key components for proper sentence structure making it a bit difficult to follow. The link I provided should answer your question regarding what we believe regarding those who don't hear the gospel. I hope that helps.

 

[JesusFan]

I have no idea what you are asking. Sorry, but sometimes you leave out subjects, verbs or other key components for proper sentence structure making it a bit difficult to follow. The link I provided should answer your question regarding what we believe regarding those who don't hear the gospel. I hope that helps.

Sorry about that!
was trying to ask IF Arminians tend to hold that God did fully appease his wrath towards sinners at Cross, reconciled them back to himself., and that he will thus judge them based upon the amount of light they got in this world...
Almost like OT ways again for the heather, those who never heard... Thru Cross has paid penalty debt their sins occured to God, and IF they respond to whatever light of the truth they might have gotten, God credits their faith as good due to the Cross?

Almost like how He can forgive small children, mentally challenged etc by paying for their sins at Cross, and reckoning that to their accounts?

 

[Skandelon]

Sorry about that!
was trying to ask IF Arminians tend to hold that God did fully appease his wrath towards sinners at Cross, reconciled them back to himself., and that he will thus judge them based upon the amount of light they got in this world...

Yes, I believe God's wrath was appeased once and for all, thus providing the means by which every individual might be reconciled to Him.

Almost like OT ways again for the heather, those who never heard... Thru Cross has paid penalty debt their sins occured to God, and IF they respond to whatever light of the truth they might have gotten, God credits their faith as good due to the Cross? Almost like how He can forgive small children, mentally challenged etc by paying for their sins at Cross, and reckoning that to their accounts?

Assuming I understand you correctly, yes, this is what I believe.

 

[JesusFan]

Yes, I believe God's wrath was appeased once and for all, thus providing the means by which every individual might be reconciled to Him.

Believe calvvinists teach same thing, some just hold it to elect ONLY, others To All...

Assuming I understand you correctly, yes, this is what I believe.

Interesting...

is that than a strictly Arminian view on what happens to those who have not heard about Jesus

I know that some Cals like me hold the same thing regarding how God saves infants/children/mentally challenged etc

have NO problem with the Lord using the atonment at the Cross thru Jesus to cover their sins...

Area still wrestling with is IF can use that to apply the grace towards adults NOW accountible to God for their personal sins!

 

[jbh28]

If I may tweak your analogy just a bit to illustrate my point: Suppose you have to pay a huge fine you CANT pay so you are about to have to go to jail instead, but the judge's son pays the fine for you, so that NOTHING is owed, its paid in full. The judge looks to you and says, "Your debt has been paid, if you will simply apologize for your crime and thank my son for his provision, you can go." Either you graciously accept the offer and confess, or in rebellion you curse the judge and go to prison.

NOW... Why did you go to prison? Was it because of your debt? NO. The debt was paid in full. It was ONLY because of your refusal to met the provision put in by the judge...to repent. "They could not enter because of their unbelief."

No, even then it would still be because of your crime. Otherwise you wouldn't be in that situation if you think about it. Jesus paid the debt as the son paid your debt. Jesus debt is applied to our accounts if we believe as the sons payment is applied to our accounts if he repents. Otherwise, Jesus didn't pay for all our sins(unbelief). If Jesus paid for the sins of unbelief and its applied, then we don't have to pay for it. That's why I said the primary reason people go to hell is because of their sin. The secondary reason is because of their unbelief.

 

[Skandelon]

No, even then it would still be because of your crime.

Not if the debt was paid for the crime. If the fine had been paid then the only thing keeping you from freedom is the PROVISION placed by the judge.

Otherwise you wouldn't be in that situation if you think about it

Sure, if I'd never committed the crime then there wouldn't have been a need for the son to pay the fine, so in that regard, yes, the cause for the son having to pay that price and for me being in front of the judge is caused by my crime, but once the fine has been paid then the ONLY thing that stands in the way of being set free is meeting the provision set by the judge.

 

[jbh28]

Not if the debt was paid for the crime. If the fine had been paid then the only thing keeping you from freedom is the PROVISION placed by the judge.

Sure, if I'd never committed the crime then there wouldn't have been a need for the son to pay the fine, so in that regard, yes, the cause for the son having to pay that price and for me being in front of the judge is caused by my crime, but once the fine has been paid then the ONLY thing that stands in the way of being set free is meeting the provision set by the judge.

but you still have a person going to hell because of a sin(unbelief) which was paid for on the cross. So if Jesus paid for our sins(all of them) and they are applied to our accounts, then there is nothing more. If I don't have belief, that was still paid for. That's why I say that if a person doesn't believe, then the atonement doesn't apply to them. They don't believe. They must now pay for their sins.

 

[Iconoclast]

skan

Can you say with certainty that all those who didn't hear about Jesus are condemned to Hell?

What we can say with certainty is all sinners are condemned to hell,unless they be found In Christ by God's electing Love and mercy.God has set His love on His elect people wherever they are found on the planet.
If God has elected them, he obviously has ordained the plan both the objects of His election[sheep] and the means of their salvation...
Electing Love and mercy is the only hope for infants who die in infancy, or mentally handicapped persons who cannot be brought to faith by the usual means.

._____ As God hath appointed the elect unto glory, so he hath, by the eternal and most free purpose of his will, foreordained all the means thereunto; wherefore they who are elected, being fallen in Adam, are redeemed by Christ, are effectually called unto faith in Christ, by his Spirit working in due season, are justified, adopted, sanctified, and kept by his power through faith unto salvation; neither are any other redeemed by Christ, or effectually called, justified, adopted, sanctified, and saved, but the elect only.( 1 Peter 1:2; 2 Thessalonians 2:13; 1 Thessalonians 5:9, 10; Romans 8:30; 2 Thessalonians 2:13; 1 Peter 1:5; John 10:26; John 17:9; John 6:64 )

Did Rahab know of Jesus? Yet, was she not justified by faith?

All OT saints knew of the promised seed.....the name was revealed after they left their bodies.....they know Him and His name now.

 

[Alive in Christ]

Do Sinners go to hell due to rejection of Christ/Or Their Sin Natures?

Sinners go to hell because they willfuly rejected Christ.

From the scriptures...

He who has the Son, has the life. He who does not have the Son. does not have the life

And then, from a few posts later...

What if they've never heard of the Lord Jesus?

According to the scriptures, all men..without exception..recieve "light" that they can heed and be saved. Since millions of people never heard the gosple of Jesus Christ in thier lifetime, they are...according to the scriptures... still given "Light" that they can accept and be saved, or reject and be lost.

It will be Jesus they are rejecting, since in the scriptures He is referred to as the "'Light' of the world".

Is our God not amazingly wonderful!:thumbs:

Hope this helps.

AiC

 

[Skandelon]

but you still have a person going to hell because of a sin(unbelief) which was paid for on the cross.

If we apply your argument to our analogy it would be like saying the judge's son paid the fine for you not apologizing and thanking him too, so you should be released regardless of your response, which is not accurate. The son didn't pay to cover the provision placed by the judge, he only paid for the debt of the crime. If you don't apologize then you won't be set free...that is why it is "provisional."

Same is true of the biblical account of provisional atonement. Rejecting Christ unto death is a rejection of the provision of God and is not covered by the cross. (many scholars equate denial of the HS wrought gospel is the unforgivable sin mentioned by Christ)