Will People Be Condemned for Not Believing in Jesus though They’ve Never Heard His Name?

[Silverhair]

LOL, you lost any interest in what you were going to say when you lead with this bag of turd.
Why should anyone listen to you when you already have such massive prejudice. Goodbye sir. You need a life.

@taisto you post "Silverhair, often we just have to trust what God tells us, even when our minds cannot understand why."

I post "@taisto it would be great if you actually trusted what the bible says."

So you use that as an excuse not to deal with the scripture that I posted. Why is that?

You are the one that agreed with what @Alan Gross had posted
"and spiritual inability
does not destroy responsibility."

So do you think that calling the character of God into question is biblical? It is not and that is why I said you should trust what the bible says.
You must think that God is confused or is just being disingenuous when He calls people to Himself through the gospel. Remember it is the calvinists that keep saying God has determined all things that happen so any spiritual inability that man has only comes from your version of God. And yet your version of God will hold man responsible for something that he has been determined unable to do.

Spend more time reading your bible and less time reading calvinist books and you my just come to know the real God of the bible.

 

[taisto]

@taisto you post "Silverhair, often we just have to trust what God tells us, even when our minds cannot understand why."

I post "@taisto it would be great if you actually trusted what the bible says."

So you use that as an excuse not to deal with the scripture that I posted. Why is that?

You are the one that agreed with what @Alan Gross had posted
"and spiritual inability
does not destroy responsibility."

So do you think that calling the character of God into question is biblical? It is not and that is why I said you should trust what the bible says.
You must think that God is confused or is just being disingenuous when He calls people to Himself through the gospel. Remember it is the calvinists that keep saying God has determined all things that happen so any spiritual inability that man has only comes from your version of God. And yet your version of God will hold man responsible for something that he has been determined unable to do.

Spend more time reading your bible and less time reading calvinist books and you my just come to know the real God of the bible.

Are you aware that your entire post is a projection from your own mind without you ever having spent any time walking with me? Read what you wrote and see that you have attempted to prophetically tell me what I and doing and then prophetically attempt to rebuke me, based solely upon the vision you have created in your mind.

Do you fancy yourself as a modern day prophet, Silverhair? I read what you have written and I recognize that not one word you have written comes from the Holy Spirit.

 

[Silverhair]

Are you aware that your entire post is a projection from your own mind without you ever having spent any time walking with me? Read what you wrote and see that you have attempted to prophetically tell me what I and doing and then prophetically attempt to rebuke me, based solely upon the vision you have created in your mind.

Do you fancy yourself as a modern day prophet, Silverhair? I read what you have written and I recognize that not one word you have written comes from the Holy Spirit.

Every moderator worth anything should rebuke you for what you are doing. But, this place is not much better than a secular discussion board with moderators even being no better.

So you disagree with what I have posted, that is your right, but rather than deal with what I have posted you do the usual and attack the poster. If you can not respond biblically to the post then just admit that you cannot. These strawman attacks do get rather tiring.

I have responded to your comments with scripture but what have you done, nothing but complain. I did expect better from you @taisto.

 

[DaveXR650]

@Alan Gross I have to ask, where do you come up with these half baked ideas? So man has no ability but he is responsible for what he can not do. That can only be the logic of someone that is getting their ideas from outside the bible.

He probably gets it from the Bible. The Bible talks about people with eyes full of adultery who cannot cease from sin. God doesn't say "well, if you really can't cease from sin then I guess it's alright". In our world, almost all sex offenders report a compulsion to do what they do, yet we hold them responsible. People who steal say "Man, I just had to have that". People who kill say "what are you supposed to do when someone disses you?" Yet we hold all of them responsible. There is nothing half baked about that idea.

 

[Silverhair]

He probably gets it from the Bible. The Bible talks about people with eyes full of adultery who cannot cease from sin. God doesn't say "well, if you really can't cease from sin then I guess it's alright". In our world, almost all sex offenders report a compulsion to do what they do, yet we hold them responsible. People who steal say "Man, I just had to have that". People who kill say "what are you supposed to do when someone disses you?" Yet we hold all of them responsible. There is nothing half baked about that idea.

@Alan Gross said this "and spiritual inability does not destroy responsibility."

What you mentioned are not spiritual inabilities. They are just sins that they freely commit. Only God could cause one to have a spiritual inability and yet He will hold them responsible. It seems that you, @Alan Gross and @taisto think this does not call God's character into question. Really?

 

[DaveXR650]

What you mentioned are not spiritual inabilities. They are just sins that they freely commit. Only God could cause one to have a spiritual inability and yet He will hold them responsible. It seems that you, @Alan Gross and @taisto think this does not call God's character into question. Really?

Maybe they mean more by it than I do but most Calvinist theologians simply do not think that men, even unelect reprobates, are not doing exactly what they want and choose to do. If that is the case then even if I have a spiritual inability, if I refuse to repent because I don't like God and like sin more, as long as I'm acting according to my will why would I not still be held responsible? Think about it. If I say that without the Holy Spirit a person is unable to repent and come to Christ, yet when I talk to him I find that he truly doesn't like Christ, and doesn't want to repent why can I not hold him responsible. Is he doing what he wants or not?

 

[Silverhair]

Maybe they mean more by it than I do but most Calvinist theologians simply do not think that men, even unelect reprobates, are not doing exactly what they want and choose to do. If that is the case then even if I have a spiritual inability, if I refuse to repent because I don't like God and like sin more, as long as I'm acting according to my will why would I not still be held responsible? Think about it. If I say that without the Holy Spirit a person is unable to repent and come to Christ, yet when I talk to him I find that he truly doesn't like Christ, and doesn't want to repent why can I not hold him responsible. Is he doing what he wants or not?

I agree that even reprobates do what they want to do and they should and will be judged for it. But the problem comes when we say the man is under "spiritual inability". Only God can cause someone to be spiritually unable to turn and trust in Christ Jesus. So if God causes that man to be that way then under what logical condition could you say the man was responsible? Could he override what God had determined for him, NO.

That is why I hold that God in His sovereignty has given man a free will, the spiritual ability, to either accept or reject salvation through faith in the finished work of Christ Jesus.

I just came across this:
Man, by his fall into a state of sin, has wholly lost all ability of will to any spiritual good accompanying salvation: so as, a natural man, being altogether averse from that good, and dead in sin, is not able, by his own strength, to convert himself, or to prepare himself thereunto. WCF 9.3

The State of Man After the Fall - Inability - WCF 9.3 | Monergism

Logically a man can only fall into/choose a state of sin if he has a free will so you cannot say he has ability and on the other hand he does not.
But since this is the Calvinist position then they have removed all responsibility for sin from man rejecting Christ.

 

[Earth Wind and Fire]

What an answer that is!

Yes or No: Does preaching the gospel to someone who has never heard it before put them in danger of eternal damnation, a danger in which they were not before?

What’s your point? And don’t ever attempt to corner me with y or n questions, I view that as manipulative and frankly BS..state your point plainly then shut up and listen to the answer. That would be an honest attempt at gaining a truthful answer… Right.

 

[Earth Wind and Fire]

How do you conclude that a person was not damned to hell if they didn't hear the gospel?
If your comment were true, then why did Jesus tell his disciples to go into all the world? Why not just hide the light under the bushel and then no one would go to hell?

Everyone is damned hell by virtue of being bound in Sin. How shall the hear without a preacher so that they can confess Jesus as Lord?

They hear through the Holy Spirit what is Devine truth. Then they look for further clarity from the temporal world… that they can and must do if they are stimulated by the Holy Spirit. A preacher, no matter how sincere and even in your face proselytizing, can not convince a non believer to regenerate… the element of God thru the HS is the salvation mechanism. That’s how your born again. Thus it is Regeneration first followed by conversion. Not the reverse.

 

[Alan Gross]

Does preaching the gospel to someone who has never heard it before put them in danger of eternal damnation,

No, yes or no.

It puts them in danger of denying the Gospel, altogether, which is the unpardonable sin against the Holy Spirit. They were already in danger of Eternal damnation.

a danger in which they were not before?

No, yes or no. Too many gyrations to the question(s).

They were condemned already, they were already in danger of Eternal damnation, based on what light they had been given and the breaking of God's laws, before ever hearing the Gospel, or ever hearing it.

 

[Revmitchell]

This has always bothered me. Clark Pinnock, who was a founding member of the Evangelical Theological Society, ended up in Open Theism, then one who believed in Annihilationism.

In the book on Open Theism, he said that he could not believe in A God who would condemn people who had never heard the name of Jesus.

I know Jesus said he was the Way. But will there be grace for those who never heard?

Rom 1:18 For the wrath of God is revealed from heaven against all ungodliness and unrighteousness of men, who by their unrighteousness suppress the truth.

Rom 1:19 For what can be known about God is plain to them, because God has shown it to them.

Rom 1:20 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.

Rom 1:21 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.

Rom 1:22 Claiming to be wise, they became fools,

Rom 1:23 and exchanged the glory of the immortal God for images resembling mortal man and birds and animals and creeping things.

Rom 1:24 Therefore God gave them up in the lusts of their hearts to impurity, to the dishonoring of their bodies among themselves,

Rom 1:25 because they exchanged the truth about God for a lie and worshiped and served the creature rather than the Creator, who is blessed forever! Amen.

Rom 1:26 For this reason God gave them up to dishonorable passions. For their women exchanged natural relations for those that are contrary to nature;

According to this verse everyone who rejects the general revelation are without excuse. There is General revelation as described here in Romans and then there is Special revelation that is the gospel of Jesus Christ. Who ever responds to the general revelation will be given special revelation:

“Whoever has will be given more, and they will have an abundance. Whoever does not have, even what they have will be taken from them.” -Matthew‬ ‭13:12‬

“He who is faithful in a very little thing is faithful also in much…” -Luke 16:10

“For the grace of God has appeared that offers salvation to all people.” -‭Titus‬ ‭2:11‬

“That was the true Light which gives light to every man coming into the world.” -John 1:9

 

[DaveXR650]

I just came across this:
Man, by his fall into a state of sin, has wholly lost all ability of will to any spiritual good accompanying salvation: so as, a natural man, being altogether averse from that good, and dead in sin, is not able, by his own strength, to convert himself, or to prepare himself thereunto. WCF 9.3

We've been over this all before and don't let anyone kid you. The fact is Owen, and all the Puritans, and Calvin have sermons and papers on record where they call for you to make a "decision" as to whether you are going to repent and have Christ as Lord or whether you are going to continue in sin and thus damn yourself. They all preach like that. And I have heard plenty of non-Calvinist preachers insist that this "call" of the Holy Spirit better be heeded now, because it may never come again and if it doesn't you won't be able to come and be lost forever. So make of it what you will.

 

[kyredneck]

@Alan Gross said this "and spiritual inability does not destroy responsibility."

What you mentioned are not spiritual inabilities. They are just sins that they freely commit. Only God could cause one to have a spiritual inability and yet He will hold them responsible. It seems that you, @Alan Gross and @taisto think this does not call God's character into question. Really?

Ever and anon the obsessed anti-Cals cry:

18 So then he hath mercy on whom he will, and whom he will be hardeneth.
19 Thou wilt say then unto me, Why doth he still find fault? For who withstandeth his will? Ro 9

 

[DaveXR650]

According to this verse everyone who rejects the general revelation are without excuse. There is General revelation as described here in Romans and then there is Special revelation that is the gospel of Jesus Christ. Who ever responds to the general revelation will be given special revelation:

Through some family connections I have access to a couple of ministries to Arabic speaking people, most of whom are Muslim. I would go to those meetings and often heard testimonies of people who with no access to Christian teaching had dreams and visions that either led them to someone who could teach them or sometimes directly lead to their belief in Christ. I was skeptical frankly but this seems to happen quite a bit, and from different sources. Too much so to be chance.

This happens to even people who are cynical and don't intend to come to Christ. One guy was staying with some friends and would go to a liturgical Presbyterian type of church where they would do a lot of responsive type things. He liked it because he would practice his English and was proud of his intelligence in that he quickly memorized most of the liturgies. He said that one day he was alone in the apartment, he threw open the window and mockingly while pretending to be praying was reciting the things he learned. He suddenly came under conviction and became a believer right there, and began repenting for real. As far as I know, he is still living a Christian life and it seems to have been for real.

 

[Silverhair]

We've been over this all before and don't let anyone kid you. The fact is Owen, and all the Puritans, and Calvin have sermons and papers on record where they call for you to make a "decision" as to whether you are going to repent and have Christ as Lord or whether you are going to continue in sin and thus damn yourself. They all preach like that. And I have heard plenty of non-Calvinist preachers insist that this "call" of the Holy Spirit better be heeded now, because it may never come again and if it doesn't you won't be able to come and be lost forever. So make of it what you will.

Dave I agree that man has to make a choice of whether to accept or reject the offer of salvation but that is not what @Alan Gross postulated with his bolded quote "and spiritual inability does not destroy responsibility."

So the question is if God has caused man to be spiritually unable to turn and trust in Him how can the man be judged responsible for not turning and trusting in Him. If man does not have a free will then he is not responsible for what he has been determined to do.

I have seen people, calvinists, try to get around this by saying that God causes some things and allows others. But what I find strange is that God never allows man to trust in Him, He has to cause that but He never causes sin He just allows it. Very convenient of God to work that way.

 

[Silverhair]

Ever and anon the obsessed anti-Cals cry:

18 So then he hath mercy on whom he will, and whom he will be hardeneth.
19 Thou wilt say then unto me, Why doth he still find fault? For who withstandeth his will? Ro 9

Is that the only thing that you can say KY. Deal with the obvious problem that @Alan Gross post presents. You just follow blindly after your calvinism without any critical thought.

 

[DaveXR650]

Dave I agree that man has to make a choice of whether to accept or reject the offer of salvation but that is not what @Alan Gross postulated with his bolded quote "and spiritual inability does not destroy responsibility."

I don't want to speak for Alan but I do know what the other Calvinists who said that exact quote actually preached. That's all I was trying to say. The spiritual inability is of a moral nature and is due to our free will. If you don't come to Christ because you think he will put a damper on what you want to do then you certainly are responsible. Where that becomes true inability is that we are not completely sovereign in "what we want to do". I right now can go make a sandwich or I can go look under a rock for a worm. Whatever choice I make is truly my choice and I am responsible for it. But I do not sovereignly choose to like sandwiches over worms. But for some reason I do. The Holy Spirit is sovereign in whether I am attracted to Christ or find things spiritual to be ridiculous. I see your point though and I cannot deny that the positioning of God's sovereignty with man's true responsibility is impossible to completely resolve.

In my opinion, in these modern days, without the political problems the Reformers faced, I think the battle between Calvinists and Arminians is tragic and hurts the cause of Christ. I have seen it happen.

 

[kyredneck]

Is that the only thing that you can say KY.

It's all that's needed to correctly answer you poor obsessed souls that constantly rail against God's Sovereign Grace.

18 So then he hath mercy on whom he will, and whom he will be hardeneth.
19 Thou wilt say then unto me, Why doth he still find fault? For who withstandeth his will?
20 Nay but, O man, who art thou that repliest against God? Shall the thing formed say to him that formed it, Why didst thou make me thus? Ro 9

 

[Silverhair]

Through some family connections I have access to a couple of ministries to Arabic speaking people, most of whom are Muslim. I would go to those meetings and often heard testimonies of people who with no access to Christian teaching had dreams and visions that either led them to someone who could teach them or sometimes directly lead to their belief in Christ. I was skeptical frankly but this seems to happen quite a bit, and from different sources. Too much so to be chance.

This happens to even people who are cynical and don't intend to come to Christ. One guy was staying with some friends and would go to a liturgical Presbyterian type of church where they would do a lot of responsive type things. He liked it because he would practice his English and was proud of his intelligence in that he quickly memorized most of the liturgies. He said that one day he was alone in the apartment, he threw open the window and mockingly while pretending to be praying was reciting the things he learned. He suddenly came under conviction and became a believer right there, and began repenting for real. As far as I know, he is still living a Christian life and it seems to have been for real.

Dave if you do a search on google you will find many stories of people that have come to faith in the true God of the bible which they did not know and in some cases did not want to know.
But we have been told that God will draw all people to Himself and we see this happening in our lifetime.

 

[Silverhair]

I don't want to speak for Alan but I do know what the other Calvinists who said that exact quote actually preached. That's all I was trying to say. The spiritual inability is of a moral nature and is due to our free will. If you don't come to Christ because you think he will put a damper on what you want to do then you certainly are responsible. Where that becomes true inability is that we are not completely sovereign in "what we want to do". I right now can go make a sandwich or I can go look under a rock for a worm. Whatever choice I make is truly my choice and I am responsible for it. But I do not sovereignly choose to like sandwiches over worms. But for some reason I do. The Holy Spirit is sovereign in whether I am attracted to Christ or find things spiritual to be ridiculous. I see your point though and I cannot deny that the positioning of God's sovereignty with man's true responsibility is impossible to completely resolve.

In my opinion, in these modern days, without the political problems the Reformers faced, I think the battle between Calvinists and Arminians is tragic and hurts the cause of Christ. I have seen it happen.

Dave I think that the word you are overlooking is "inability". If a person has a free will, spiritual ability, they may choose to accept or reject the gospel message but if they have "spiritual inability" that would logically mean they do not have the ability to do something eg freely accept or reject the gospel message.

You wrote "The spiritual inability is of a moral nature and is due to our free will." that is a contradiction. One can not have a spiritual inability and a free will at the same time. Inability negates the ability to exercise ones free will.