Originally posted by Helen:
First of all, Andy, the Bible says that Jesus died for ALL sin and tasted death for ALL men. If anyone thinks that they go to hell for their sins, they they are saying first that Jesus did not do a complete job and, second, that the Bible is wrong.
Boy, I am not on the board for a few days and we add 6 pages to this post??? I can't keep up. I have no idea what was said on pages 5-10, so I'll just chime in with what I read here.
IF Jesus died for and tasted death for all men, then everyone goes to heaven. You are a universalist. You say, "Oh, no, but people go to hell for rejecting Jesus." I ask, is rejecting Jesus a sin? If Jesus died for all sin for all men, then He died for that one too. Your position is unbibilical.
Now, I cannot speak for Me4Him and I disagree with much of what this person says. So I am responding on my own behalf here. Do people who have never heard of Jesus automatically go to heaven? NO! But they don't automatically go to hell, either.
Exsqueeze Me?!? Baking powder?!? I'm sorry, but this is patently unbiblical. If those who have never heard don't automatically go to heaven or hell, where do they go? Are you a second-chancer, who believes that people get the option to repent and believe at the judgment? If this is true, why the great commission? Why share the gospel at all?
All the ancient cultures remember in legend and story the creation and the flood. All have some memory involved in these two of a Promise made by God to rescue men. The faithful of the Old Testament did not know the name of Jesus. But they knew the Promise and believed on the Promise and that Promise was Jesus. We are incredibly blessed that we have an historical fact to look back on. But those before had a Promise to look forward to, and that faith is the channel, if you will, through which God's grace saved them.
At the end of Hebrews 11 we read of these people:
"These were all commended for their faith, yet none of them received what had been promised. God had planned something better for us so that only together with us would they be made perfect [complete]."
The reason for missionaries is to tell the people of the world "God did it! He fulfilled the Promise -- and here is how it happened...." Why should those who have trusted almost blindly not be given the same blessing we have -- to know Who the Promise was fulfilled in and what He said and everything that happened?
I almost don't know where to start with this... Do most cultures have some legends or stories that have some amount of truth in them? Of course they do. Most cultures have a flood story. Does it matter that the truth is mixed with a lot of error? Let's ask the Mormons that one.
Even more importantly, using your example, would it not have been better (especially for the Jews) for Christ to never have come? All would have had some faith in a promise that they didn't know all the facts about and no one would have been held accountable.
Yet Paul describes the Jews that had rejected the Messiah as "having a zeal for God but not according to knowledge." A "zeal for God but not according to knowledge" is the exact equivalent to being lost.
These cultures that mix truth with error in their faith in the promise (as you describe it) are guilty of a very serious sin - idolatry. God has revealed Himself and we must worship Him in spirit and in truth, not in spirit and partial truth.
Age of accountability does not mean someone has not sinned before that. It means that he has sinned unknowingly and as Paul stated in Romans 7:11+, until the law is known, sin is dead. It may be there, but it is separated from the person in the sense that it cannot cause his spiritual death. Paul says similar in Romans 5:13 -- "Sin is not taken into account when there is no law."
And yet those Jews who sinned unintentionally and unknowingly in the OT still had to offer sacrifices, showing their guilt and need for cleansing. Those Gentiles who do not have the law, still die and are under the judgment of God, even though they don't know the law and shouldn't be held accountable. Have you never read what God told Joshua to do to those poor Canaanites who should not have been accountable for their sins because they had never heard the Law? Something is flawed in your reasoning.
So we make laws for our children that they can learn to obey. Learning to obey without fear is paramount for learning about God and a relationship with Him. Learning that laws are for the benefit of the receiver and not the giver is also extremely important.
Sometimes I want my children to fear consequences, and even me, just like God wants us to fear Him.
But there does come a time, according to Romans 7, when the law does come into a life as a known and understood law from God. When that happens sin does spring to life, the person sins volitionally and is then separated from God, or spiritually dead.
When do you suggest that Paul was without the Law? He was born a Jew of the tribe of Benjamin. He was circumcized on the 8th day according to the Law, so he was under the Law by at least 8 days old. He would have been taught the Law by his parents from the moment his mom had her last contraction. He would have studied in the local synagogue from a very early age. He sat at the feet of Gamaliel. When was he without the law?
Paul's main point in Romans 7:7-11 is that the Law does not conquer sin, it only reveals sin. He makes his point first and then further describes it.
Romans 7:7 What shall we say then? Is the law sin? Certainly not! On the contrary, I would not have known sin except through the law. For I would not have known covetousness unless the law had said, "You shall not covet."
This is his point - the Law revealed sin. He doesn't then go on in the next few verses to describe something completely different, like "babies are not accountable because they don't understand right from wrong." That's a ridiculous way of interpreting this text. The next few verses describe what happened when this self-righteous Pharisee really understood the law - it condemned him rather than saving him.
Romans 7:8-11 But sin, taking opportunity by the commandment, produced in me all manner of evil desire. For apart from the law sin was dead. 9 I was alive once without the law, but when the commandment came, sin revived and I died. 10 And the commandment, which was to bring life, I found to bring death. 11 For sin, taking occasion by the commandment, deceived me, and by it killed me.
The law says, "Don't covet." Rather than giving Paul the ability not to covet, it almost forces him to do it because, now, his sinful nature kicks in (it revived) and He dies. The fact that it says sin was dead doesn't mean it wasn't there and he wasn't accountable for it. It means it was inactive or powerless (relatively). The same is true of faith in James 2:17 - Faith without works is dead. It doesn't mean it's not there; it means it's innactive or powerless.
The purpose of the law was to bring life. Instead, because we all disobey, the penalty is death. This is Paul's point here. It is not that all of a sudden, when I understand the law, I am held accountable for it. It is that I was accountable before, and when the law came in, it told me what I was accountable for and didn't provide a way to obey it. It just pronounced judgment for disobedience.
All sin is paid for, atoned for, on the cross. But not all sin is forgiven. That is an entirely different matter.
Wrong. If sin is paid for, and atoned for (covered), it is forgiven. That is one of the main problems with free-willers. You don't understand the meaning of atonement. There is not going to be one person in hell who will be able to say that they are there despite the fact that their sins were atoned for. If God has been paid, why would He exact more payment after someone has died?
That is why John tells us "If we confess our sins, he is faithful and just and will forgive us our sins and purify us from all unrighteousness."
This is a verse written to believers, not unbelievers. It talks about the continual cleansing power of the blood of Christ. It is conditional on confessions, no doubt. But there is also no doubt what John was saying - if you do not confess your sins, you are not one of His. Therefore, all believers continually confess their sins.
Forgiveness takes two: the "I'm sorry" person and the "You're forgiven" person.
You are sort of right, at least as it touches this verse. But don't make a hard and fast rule of this. I can forgive someone without them ever coming and saying I'm sorry. God can do the same.
ALL people are potentially saved because of Christ's work.
Here is my problem - THE BIBLE DOESN'T SAY THIS!!! The Bible never says that Christ's death potentially saved anyone. It says He came to save. It says He is the propitiation (not potential propitiation). It says He atoned (not potentially atoned). You add a word that is antithetical to all biblical teaching.
It was for the whole world, and showed His desire that not one should be lost.
"Whole world" can't possibly mean every individual who has ever lived. Jesus did not die for Judas Iscariot. He was the son of perdition before the foundation of the world. If Jesus died for Him and God really desired that he not be lost, then God is the most sadistic being in existence.
But how few come to repentance? Not many, really. Most people prefer the defenses of their own pride and 'power.' I think that is why so many people have to be allowed by God to get to the very end of their proverbial ropes before they will scream to Him for help.
I agree. Sometimes that is what God uses to bring the elect to Himself. And don't balk at the usage of the word elect, because that is what the Bible says.
But there are those who spend their lives wanting the truth and living by what they know of it. These people are truly blessed, for God uses them every day of their lives and they are led easily to Christ and recognize Him as the truth they have been searching for. These are the seekers God wants us all to be: "You will seek me and find me when you seek me with all your heart." Jer. 29:13. (I just noticed in the concordance that there are two different words for 'seek' used there. The first is simply to look for and the second, used in 'seek me with all your heart' means more a determined demanding sort of seeking. It is a person who will not rest until he HAS found the truth.)
Romans 3:10-11 As it is written: "There is none righteous, no, not one; 11 There is none who understands; There is none who seeks after God.
