Why would God punish people that have no chance of salvation?

[jbh28]

I disagree that it can be sufficient for someone not intended or made for.

Well, it can be. If everyone got saved, no additional payment is required. It's sufficient to cover their sins.

...and He would also be perfectly just for resurrecting every animal in Heaven, but that's apples and oranges. We are discussing Christ's death, His atonement and how it relates to human beings not angelic beings.

You're not getting it. It's not apples and oranges. We are discussing if God is just for sending someone to hell and not giving them a chance to be saved. Angels have sinned and will be sent to hell(not dogs and cats). Is God just in doing that? Yes. So he would also be just to send people to hell and not give them a chance to be saved. Angelic beings is an example of another situation.

 

[preacher4truth]

Ok, I will stop preaching. But let me ask you this. I believe i am saved and going to heaven. Can I still go to heaven even if I dont join your elite club of Calvinists?:saint:

John

No need to bring Calvinism into this. Perhaps if you adjust this severe error of yours into truth, and truly study theology, you'll begin to see that Calvinist/Reformed/DoG are totally Scriptural.

You're clearly in error here with your "their only going to go there if they reject Jesus" fallacy. Please adjust this error into Biblical teaching. It's a good place to start to get yourself going down the right track.

One more thing, those that are non-cal I still receive as brothers.

Elite? No need for personal innuendoes, keep this conversation Christian minus the intended malice, OK?

 

[Grasshopper]

Wasn't talking to you

You are now.:smilewinkgrin:

 

[Grasshopper]

No need to bring Calvinism into this. Perhaps if you adjust this severe error of yours into truth, and truly study theology, you'll begin to see that Calvinist/Reformed/DoG are totally Scriptural.

You're clearly in error here with your "their only going to go there if they reject Jesus" fallacy. Please adjust this error into Biblical teaching. It's a good place to start to get yourself going down the right track.

One more thing, those that are non-cal I still receive as brothers.

Elite? No need for personal innuendoes, keep this conversation Christian minus the intended malice, OK?

Congrats, I'm hateful and disrespectful and you an elitist. Somebody must be losing an argument.

 

[Thousand Hills]

Ok, I will stop preaching. But let me ask you this. I believe i am saved and going to heaven. Can I still go to heaven even if I dont join your elite club of Calvinists?:saint:

John

No elite in the club, just sinners saved by grace. Spurgeon says it best IMO.

I believe the doctrine of election, because I am quite certain that, if God had not chosen me, I should never have chosen Him; and I am sure He chose me before I was born, or else He never would have chosen me afterwards; and He must have elected me for reasons unknown to me, for I never could find any reason in myself why He should have looked upon me with special love.

 

[seekingthetruth]

No need to bring Calvinism into this. Perhaps if you adjust this severe error of yours into truth, and truly study theology, you'll begin to see that Calvinist/Reformed/DoG are totally Scriptural.

You're clearly in error here with your "their only going to go there if they reject Jesus" fallacy. Please adjust this error into Biblical teaching. It's a good place to start to get yourself going down the right track.

One more thing, those that are non-cal I still receive as brothers.

Elite? No need for personal innuendoes, keep this conversation Christian minus the intended malice, OK?

I apologise about that preacher. I was really not being serious, I was really just being a smart alleck.:smilewinkgrin:

For what it's worth, I do enjoy these debates. Even when they become heated they are still beneficial for learning. I may disagree with you but I respect you, and I certainly wish i had your biblical knowledge and background.

I would love to see you and my pastor debate. Wow, that would be better than Perry vs Romney.

John

 

[preacher4truth]

I apologise about that preacher. I was really not being serious, I was really just being a smart alleck.:smilewinkgrin:

For what it's worth, I do enjoy these debates. Even when they become heated they are still beneficial for learning. I may disagree with you but I respect you, and I certainly wish i had your biblical knowledge and background.

I would love to see you and my pastor debate. Wow, that would be better than Perry vs Romney.

John

No problem and apology accepted.

I know others have heard the preacher say "People are going to hell for rejecting Jesus!" It all sounds good, but it is not thought out, and it is not Biblical. No, they are already heading there now.

Keep in mind that we are responsible both intellectually and spiritually for our condition. Note Jesus rebuking Nicodemous for not "knowing" things he should no, and was rebuked for it being a teacher in Israel. (John 3) There's nothing "spiritual" about being ignorant, and believe me, I've actaully heard preachers brag about being ignorant.

One preacher tells a story, whom I totally respect, of a preacher at a preaching fellowship, who had gotten himself into a tantrum bragging about how he is "glad to be ignorant!" He said "I pray God will make me more ignoranter and more ignoranter!!!" Someone stood up and told him "I think God has already answered your prayer!"

- Peace

 

[Alive in Christ]

Amy G...

How do you think they heard?

How do I think?? Why do you ask me?

All I did was post Gods scriptures.

Go back and read the scriptures that are in my post, and you will discover how they heard. :thumbs:

God bless

 

[jbh28]

It would do them no good to repent even if they wanted to because there was never an atonement made for angels.

Exactly. And God is just to send them to hell without a sufficient payment.

 

[preacher4truth]

Exactly. And God is just to send them to hell without a sufficient payment.

I think part of the non-cal problem here is not knowing or understanding the justice of God and His Sovereignty.

 

[jbh28]

Jesus died physically...are you implying He committed personal sin?

Spiritual death is separation due to sin, as was the case with Adam. He died the day he ate the fruit (not physically, spiritually)

Again...HUGE problem here with Christ's death.

Good response.

If the other was true, if Christ had not died on the cross, there would be no need to believe and therefore no one would have gone to hell.

 

[freeatlast]

Again, I can't answer the question of people that have never heard the gospel.

But, for us that have heard it, the only way we go to hell is by rejecting it.

John

I am not trying to be smart here but the only reason you do not know what happens to those who never hear is because you do not properly understand why man is lost and that there is only one way to salvation.

Yes you may claim you understand but you cannot possibly understand if you do not know what happens to those who never hear. If people could escape hell by not hearing, and thus never rejecting Jesus, then we better stop spreading the gospel.

It does not take a literal rejection of Jesus to end up in eternal torment. However It does take a literal acceptance of Jesus as Lord to end up in heaven.

 

[Crabtownboy]

A quote from Annie Dillard:

Eskimo: "If I did not know about God and sin, would I go to hell?" Priest: "No, not if you did not know." Eskimo: "Then why did you tell me?"

 

[preacher4truth]

A quote from Annie Dillard:

Eskimo: "If I did not know about God and sin, would I go to hell?" Priest: "No, not if you did not know." Eskimo: "Then why did you tell me?"

:laugh: :laugh: :laugh: :thumbs:

 

[freeatlast]

A quote from Annie Dillard:

Eskimo: "If I did not know about God and sin, would I go to hell?" Priest: "No, not if you did not know." Eskimo: "Then why did you tell me?"

Exactly! :thumbs:

 

[seekingthetruth]

I am not trying to be smart here but the only reason you do not know what happens to those who never hear is because you do not properly understand why man is lost and that there is only one way to salvation.

Yes you may claim you understand but you cannot possibly understand if you do not know what happens to those who never hear. If people could escape hell by not hearing, and thus never rejecting Jesus, then we better stop spreading the gospel.

It does not take a literal rejection of Jesus to end up in eternal torment. However It does take a literal acceptance of Jesus as Lord to end up in heaven.

Ok, I can agree to this. This is better than saying that we go to hell for rejecting Jesus. We can say that we go to heaven for accepting Him.

It boils down to the same thing. Jesus already paid for our sins, and our eternity depends on whether we accept that or not. If we accept it then our earthly sins are forgiven, and if we don't accept it then our earthly sins are not forgiven. Still, either way you look at it, our salvation is based the choice we make, not on our sins.

OK, you explain to me how God is revealed to the people that never hear the gospel, and what happens to them. I agree with you, I don't understand it, so please explain it to me. Many say that God reveals Himself to all men one way or another. I don't know.

John

 

[Winman]

Ok, I can agree to this. This is better than saying that we go to hell for rejecting Jesus. We can say that we go to heaven for accepting Him.

It boils down to the same thing. Jesus already paid for our sins, and our eternity depends on whether we accept that or not. If we accept it then our earthly sins are forgiven, and if we don't accept it then our earthly sins are not forgiven. Still, either way you look at it, our salvation is based the choice we make, not on our sins.

OK, you explain to me how God is revealed to the people that never hear the gospel, and what happens to them. I agree with you, I don't understand it, so please explain it to me. Many say that God reveals Himself to all men one way or another. I don't know.

John

John, NOBODY knows how God deals with those who have never heard the gospel. All we know is that God is just and will do what is right. But not knowing how God deals with these persons does not support either the Cal or non- Cal view. We simply don't know.

So, this type of argument is meaningless, NOBODY really knows what they are talking about in this area.

 

[Greektim]

Ok, I can agree to this. This is better than saying that we go to hell for rejecting Jesus. We can say that we go to heaven for accepting Him.

It boils down to the same thing. Jesus already paid for our sins, and our eternity depends on whether we accept that or not. If we accept it then our earthly sins are forgiven, and if we don't accept it then our earthly sins are not forgiven. Still, either way you look at it, our salvation is based the choice we make, not on our sins.

OK, you explain to me how God is revealed to the people that never hear the gospel, and what happens to them. I agree with you, I don't understand it, so please explain it to me. Many say that God reveals Himself to all men one way or another. I don't know.

John

This is what is so scarry about non-calvi doctrine. It is admittedly man centered. "Salvation is based [on] the choice we make." Jesus mentioned only once and only in the sense of salvation proviso. The 1st person plural pronoun "we" or "us" was mentioned 10 times. I find that glaring. But just an observation.

 

[freeatlast]

Ok, I can agree to this. This is better than saying that we go to hell for rejecting Jesus. We can say that we go to heaven for accepting Him.

It boils down to the same thing. Jesus already paid for our sins, and our eternity depends on whether we accept that or not. If we accept it then our earthly sins are forgiven, and if we don't accept it then our earthly sins are not forgiven. Still, either way you look at it, our salvation is based the choice we make, not on our sins.

OK, you explain to me how God is revealed to the people that never hear the gospel, and what happens to them. I agree with you, I don't understand it, so please explain it to me. Many say that God reveals Himself to all men one way or another. I don't know.

John

John first no one is ever born an atheist. That takes self will and practice. Also just because man is religious does not mean he wants Truth either.
Second Romans 1:20 tells us this.
For the invisible things of him from the creation of the world are clearly seen, being understood by the things that are made, [even] his eternal power and Godhead; so that they are without excuse:

He first reveals Himself through His creation..

So even those who do not hear the gospel have enough light to decide if they want truth (more light) or not. At that point it becomes God's responsibility to get to them the amount of light needed to receive Jesus as Lord which comes by the word of God. Faith comes by hearing and hearing the word of God.
For those who never hear and who never act on the light they were given initially they remain in their sin by personal choice of rejecting more light even though they never hear the gospel.

 

[seekingthetruth]

This is what is so scarry about non-calvi doctrine. It is admittedly man centered. "Salvation is based [on] the choice we make." Jesus mentioned only once and only in the sense of salvation proviso. The 1st person plural pronoun "we" or "us" was mentioned 10 times. I find that glaring. But just an observation.

Ok, if your statement is true, but if we don't have a choice to make ,then why did Jesus always confront the people He met with a choice?

Jesus gave them all a choice, what has changed?

John