Cross Question
Posted on January 19th, 2007 by Reformed Pope into the Uncategorized categoryI would like to pose a question for debate:
If Jesus died, paying for the sins of all, how can God justly condemn anyone? Can sin be paid for twice?
This leads me to another question:
When Jesus died on the cross, what sins did he pay for?
- All sins from all man…thus the whole world receives salvation.
- Only the sins of a select few…thus leaving salvation up for God to chose who receives it.
- He did not pay for any sins…thus leaving salvation solely up to us.
RSS feed for posts
January 19th, 2007 at 4:44 pm
Other possibilities would be:
4. Only those who accept Jesus as their savior.
5. Those who believe in salvation through a combination of grace and works.
I always wondered what happened to the people who live and die who have never even heard of Jesus? Are they doomed because of their ignorance, or do they get a pass because it wasn’t their fault? What about the folks born before Christ?
So many questions….
January 19th, 2007 at 5:04 pm
I see your option 4 as being the same as my option 3.
If that were the case, then when Jesus died he didn’t actually save anyone…His death would leave salvation up to our decisions and, in fact, His death could be in vain if no one were to choose Him…
Furthermore, if “every inclination of [our] heart is evil from childhood” (Gen 8:21) how could we choose Him? But surely God wouldn’t send Him to die in vain…right?
(By no means am I close to having any of the answers, these are just questions rolling around in my head)
January 19th, 2007 at 5:08 pm
Careful, these are the kind of questions that might lead to DISCUSSION….. and everybody knows that DISCUSSION is DANGEROUS!
January 19th, 2007 at 6:09 pm
Dangerous? Maybe. But I believe that unanswered questions aren’t nearly as dangerous as unquestioned answers.
January 19th, 2007 at 8:24 pm
People have a choice to accept the gift of salvation. All they need to do is accept it.
In other words, if you give someone a gift, and they refuse it… do they still own the gift?
January 19th, 2007 at 8:38 pm
Here’s how I believe it works.. simplified:
1) Everyone sins.
2) God justly condemns everyone.
3) Jesus dies, sinless. In our place. As a sacrifice in our place.
4) We can accept that sacrifice, or we can reject it.
5) If we reject it, then we continue to be condemned.
6) If we accept it, then Jesus literally dies, every moment in time, in our place. Hence we are still condemned, but the penalty is paid by Jesus.
A good question you might next ask is “How can one tiny moment of Jesus’ actual death pay the price for billions of people from time starting until time stops?”
And yes, there is a question. Let me know if you want the answer. It’s amazingly simple, but does require some understanding of dimensions of time.
OK, here’s the quick summary.
1) God isn’t subject to our single dimension of linear time. By definition, if God created it, he isn’t bound to it. God must exist in at least two or more dimensions of time. He states this himself when he says “I AM”. (Meaning he was, is, and will be.)
2) Thus, if God basically exists without restriction to our “start” point of time, then every moment of our time dimension can be viewed as the same instant for God. For God, everything is happening at the same time. Literally. (That’s how he knows the future, too..)
3) So Jesus’ death occured in one blip of OUR time dimension. A fleeting moment. But to God, it is *always* happening. Jesus is forever, always, literally dying for us. So every second we breath, Jesus is literally dying in God’s eyes, paying the price. Thus, we are restored to God and he can fellowship with us.
Hope that makes sense.
January 19th, 2007 at 8:40 pm
Those who go to Heaven ride on a pass and enter into blessings that they never earned, but all who go to hell pay their own way.
-John Rice
Either He pays or we pay, but someone has to pay. If you don’t let Jesus do it, then you have to. Simple.
January 19th, 2007 at 8:51 pm
Does the decision to accept or reject have to be made in this life, or will there be some people who accept only after they ’see the goods’ (see Him f2f)?
January 19th, 2007 at 9:03 pm
I think God knows the heart. I think He gives us as many chances as are possible while alive. I believe after we are dead, if He knows we won’t accept Him, He won’t give us another chance. If He knows we would, He might give you one last chance.
I cannot believe He wouldn’t give everyone the same chance. I choose to believe people who don’t know about Him in this life will be told the whole story when they die and than be given a choice. Some, even then, will still reject Him.
January 19th, 2007 at 9:12 pm
Here’s a challenge for you, if you are truly sincere about these questions, and are willing to dig for yourself, do a quick word search on an online Bible for the word ’sinners’. There are only about 44 mentions; go through each one and see if more than one of them relate to us ‘after‘ conversion…….nudge……..go ahead, I’ll wait here…..:o)
(In particular, John 9:31 should be fascinating) *wink*
Now if you are interested, (I saved you a lot of scanning here, but you could do it if you want
) you could find that after conversion, God no longer calls us ’sinners’, but;
saints (approximately 62 times)
children of God (around 14)
a holy nation (once)
a chosen generation (once)
a royal priesthood (once)
the Body of Christ (3-ish)
His own special people (twice)
the people of God (around 6)
Have you ever heard of that little diddy, “The Few. The Proud. The Marines.” Do you know WHY they came up with that? Because human nature will usually rise up to the expectations of a worthy name and standard. A name used to mean something to people. There was a day when a man’s name was considered one of his greatest possessions, and he would go through great pains to keep it from being tarnished in any way.
I wonder why those who claim bear the most precious Name in the world would want to be so casual about it??
January 19th, 2007 at 9:12 pm
RP asks,
While it may not be helpful to some, one thing that has greatly helped me sort through such tough and valid questions, is settling in my mind that God has not given mankind sufficient mental capacity to fathom and completely sort out many of the whys and wherefores of His approach to things.
I will never mentally be able to grasp how God can be sovereign and yet my choices really do matter. I will never be able to fathom how Jesus can be 100% man and 100% God. So also, I can’t fully comprehend the answer to RP’s question, except to say that God declares both things to be true. Jesus did pay for our sins, and they are paid for, but if we reject His free gift then we are left without the provision of His gift. It seems illogical, but this is how He says things are, and if I’m to move past my intellectual confusion the only way I’m going to do it is to accept that both are true because He says so, and nothing more.
He says my accepting His offer is not paying my own price, through some form of acceptance work.
John 6:29 says “Jesus answered and said unto them, This is the work of God, that ye believe on him whom he hath sent.”
Faith is the only work we can do and still do no works, because faith is the opposite of self works. Either it is going to be faith works or self effort works, but not both.
John again speaks to this in 1 John 2:2 where he says “And He Himself is the propitiation for our sins, and not for ours only but also for the whole world. ”
The word propitiation means “complete satisfaction with.” As best as I can understand this verse he is telling us no one will go to Hell because of their specific sins. The only thing that sends a man to hell is the rejection of the provision that Jesus’ propitiation offers. If this were not so then the only appropriate doctrine to preach would be Universal Reconciliation, and while that doctrine has many worthy supporters, according to my studies it leaves some very important questions unanswered, for which because they can’t be answered I’m unable to support that doctrine. Therefore I conclude that the New Testament’s command to receive Jesus’ work is essential even though I’m unable to fully comprehend why.
I’m mesmerized though, by the notion that no man goes to hell because of his sin. All sin has been paid for. We’ve discussed all manner of sin on this blog, but the fact is no matter how heiness a sin may be it will never send anyone to hell. Ultimately the only sin that sends a man to hell is the rejection of Jesus’ work.
This doesn’t deny Paul’s words in 1 Cor 6, where he gives his grocery list of those who unrepentantly sin a variety of sins and will not enter the kingdom of God because of it. All Paul is saying is that anyone who lives in any of those sins proves he has not received Jesus’ propitiation, and thus is still dead in his sins.
Stopping those sins doesn’t save a person, but truly receiving Jesus’ provision will do such a work in a person’s heart that they will stop a life of sin in any of those areas. This is not to say they will never sin again, but it is to say they will never again live in those sins, do so consciously, and do so with disdain for Jesus’ work. All of us sin again, and some of us sin the same sins many times before we learn to walk in the Spirit and overcome them, but time+learning to walk in the Spirit+learning the nature of our sin+learning the entry points in our nature for sin to get a grip on us+confession+grace+a mystical and unexplainable something from Jesus will reduce the sin we do until each specific sin ultimately yields to the Spirit’s work.
January 20th, 2007 at 5:11 pm
Why Tom, that’s so simple minded of you! *wink*
Psalm 131
1 LORD, my heart is not haughty,
Nor my eyes lofty.
Neither do I concern myself with great matters,
Nor with things too profound for me.
2 Surely I have calmed and quieted my soul,
Like a weaned child with his mother;
Like a weaned child is my soul within me.
Years ago, when I was much more ‘intellectual’, I suffered much confusion, anxiety and doubt because of my ceaseless struggle to categorize and package my…’faith’…in a reliable, sensible formula… This verse seemed to chase away the chilly mental fog and wrap a warm, comforting blanket around my uneasy spirit…
January 20th, 2007 at 7:13 pm
Hungry,
Thank you for the wink, but, I find myself wondering if you agree with what I wrote, regarding reliance upon the Spirit, because I often find myself hearing something akin to trusting determined self effort, in the tone of your writings. Am I missreading your blogs?
January 20th, 2007 at 7:58 pm
Apparently…
January 22nd, 2007 at 9:20 am
Thanks for your comment Tom,
This gives me something to think about.
January 23rd, 2007 at 12:22 pm
Tom,
I really wish it were that simple,but 1 John 2:2 is not the only verse speaking about for whom Christ died Isa53:11,12 Matt. 20:28 Mark 14:24 Luke 10:15 and elswhere in the epistles speak of Christ dieing for us, or for many or for His people or His sheep. If it was always mentioned in scripture as all the question would be mute.
Johnpaul’s question is valid, did Christ’s death really acomplish salvation for a certain people and not others or did it just make salvation possible for all? Either way His atonement is limited in either it’s power or in it’s scope.
Also people go to hell for not repenting of both their sin nature and their specific sins I don’t see it as either or but both and.
January 23rd, 2007 at 12:48 pm
Here’s an interesting one:
Death and hell deliver up the dead IN them BEFORE death and hell are cast into the lake of fire, where death and hell are no more.
What puzzles me is, those who are in hell are judged according to their ‘works’. Might some who are in ‘hell’ be granted life at judgment? Can anyone who is in ‘hell’ now have their name in the ‘book of life’ (Rev 20:15)? Rev. 20:15 and Rev. 21:8 doesn’t say anyone will be thrown into the lake of fire, those scriptures only cite conditions where if true, someone would be tossed into the lake of fire.
Rev. 22:15 is a puzzle - assuming Rev. is sequential, judgment has happened, death and hell have been thrown in the lake of fire, the Book of Life has been read, those who are in it have geen given entry into the city. So what are the ‘dogs, sorcerers, whoremongers, murderers, idolators and liars’ doing “without” the city? I thought they would be tossed into the lake of fire with hell and death?
Do these passages confuse anyone else? They certainly do not support the common view of ‘eternal hell’ - especially when it says hell will regurgitate the dead before hell is thrown into the lake of fire …
Jack
January 23rd, 2007 at 1:10 pm
Jeremiah,
I certainly agree with you, that explaining the truth regarding scripture’s position on sin and its ramifications, is not simple.
Let me try another approach at it.
As John444 quotes, there are many scriptures that indicate people are thrown into the lake of fire because of their sin. So, if Jesus’ death provided propitiation (spiritual satisfaction of God’s violated righteousness) then how could people still be judged for their sin?
It seems the answer is this: While it is true God has been propitiated by Jesus’ death, and man’s salvation is not based on his stopping his sins, but is based on accepting Christ’s work on the cross in his behalf, yet, if a man chooses to reject Christ’s work on his behalf, then when it comes time for final judgments it appears the one who rejected Christ’s work will then be rejected and his sins will be imputed to him since He rejected Christ’s propitiation.
One might analogize it as follows: If I purchase a medication for you that will remove the blemishes from your face but you refuse that medication, then while you could have had them removed you chose not to. The purchase price was paid to the Father by the Son. The Father is poised to grant the blemish removing medication, but the individual who has the blemishes says “I like my blemishes and I won’t accept your offer to heal them.” The purchase price the Son paid had completely satisfied the Father’s righteous demand, and released Him to make the offer to those who receive it, but it didn’t move Him to force anyone to receive it. Thus, at death he passes to the judgment of God, and because his blemishes prove he has rejected the Father and Son’s offer, he is judged on the basis of his sins, as if the Son had not propitiated the Father. In other words the application of the propitiation doesn’t take place until it is accepted. He therefore remains in his sins and will be judged on the basis of them, though ultimately the sin he is pre-eminently judged for is the sin of the rejection of the Son’s provision.
Analogies are never perfect things, but this is the best I can offer you at this point.
I therefore would conclude Christ’s work made salvation possible for mankind, but it is only received by faith in the finished work of Christ. All others perish in their sin. Unlimited propitiation, but limited reconciliation.
So “yes,” people will go to Hell for a failure to repent from both their inherited sin from Adam, as well as their specific sins, but only because they rejected the Son’s offer for reconciliation with the Father.
January 23rd, 2007 at 1:34 pm
Tom,
So salvation is up to man? God votes for you, the devil votes against you and the deciding ballot is in our hands?
I do believe in free will to a degree but no one desires God apart from Him drawing them. John 6:44 Rom 8:6,7 1 Cor. 2:14
Am I building a straw man? I hope not. Bottom line, on our knees we all agree in prayer, that when our heart goes out to a loved one to know the Lord, we ask God to save them, not for them to save themselves, we pray that there eyes would be opened because they are blinded and cannot see themselves or heal there sight, so that they might turn from darkness to light from the power of satan unto God that they may recieve salvation.-Acts 26:17-18
Grace and peace, jeremiah
January 23rd, 2007 at 1:38 pm
John444,
You ask a really good question.
Listen to Revelation 15:
Rev 15:2 And I saw what appeared to be a sea of glass mingled with fire –and also those who had conquered the beast and its image and the number of its name, standing beside the sea of glass with harps of God in their hands.
Is it possible this lake of fire, of Revelation 20 and 21, is the same as the sea of fire in Rev. 15?
If so, notice that this sea/lake appears to be something that the righteous will have close proximity to, without being in it.
And, if Rev 22:14-15, is just another way of describing the lake of fire, I.e. that which is surrounding the holy city, then the two images could connect.
It may therefore be that the lake of fire will be in very close proximity to the holy city, and able to be continually seen by the inhabitants of that city.
Then add in Rev 14:
Rev 14:10 he also will drink the wine of God’s wrath, poured full strength into the cup of his anger, and he will be tormented with fire and sulfur in the presence of the holy angels and in the presence of the Lamb.
And it seems to shred the notion that the lake of fire will be a place that is horrible because it lacks the presence of God. This would make sense if this sea/lake is just outside the gates of the holy city.
So, here is the $64,000 question? Why would God place His presence and the presence of His angels, and those believers who had conquered the beast, near to those in the lake of fire? What would the purpose be for this?
John sees humans in the lake of fire:
Revelation 21:8 KJV But the fearful, and unbelieving, and abominable, and murderers, and whoremongers, and sorcerers, and idolaters, and all liars, shall have their part in the lake which burneth with fire and brimstone: which is the second death.
So, “yes” it appears that not just hell and death are cast into this lake, but also humans.
But, why are they there? Just to be punished for their sin? Is so, why wouldn’t they be completely banished from God’s presence, the angels presence, and the saints presence? Their presence being near to this lake makes me wonder what purpose their presence there serves? Unless the glassy sea of fire, and the lake of fire are two completely different places, but it doesn’t seem so. And, if these two places are the same, then what are the harps of God for? Singing to them? Worshipping before them? Why? Taunts, reminders, or something more redemptive???
Finally, if the image of “the sea” is generally an image signifying “masses of humanity,” then is the “lake/sea” not actually referring to anything like some body of fiery water, or something like that, but just a place for amassing those who rejected Christ. And a couple more questions: Is this a literal, flesh or something burning, type fire, or could it be because those in this realm are now all spiritual beings that this is a spiritual fire? If it is a spiritual fire, what spiritual purpose would a spiritual fire have?
So, I have questions too, and I have not found the answers to these questions. We may not know them until we arrive there.
All I know, is that no matter what these seas/lakes ending up being, I don’t want to be in them. Today is the day of salvation…
January 23rd, 2007 at 1:49 pm
Jeremiah,
Such important questions, and are those that the great ones Calvin and Arminius both argued over.
What is the answer? I certainly don’t know, but here is how I’ve approached it:
The scriptures communicate both the sovereign choices of God as well as the real choices of man. Could man choose God without God’s help? I think not. Does God help all men? Calvin said no, Arminius appears to have thought He does. Who’se right? If man could choose God, would his choice be meritorious? Scripture would seem to say no.
My spiritual hunch is that God’s choices are what save a man, but that His choices include man’s being given the ability to choose Him and thus make him responsible to so choose.
The question then becomes, does God give this same ability to all men? Once again, Calvin said no, and Arminius said yes. I don’t know the answer to this question. I’ve never been satisfied with anyone elses answer either.
I conclude it is a mystery, meaning that man’s mind is incapable of satisfactorily resolving these tensions, and thus we acknowledge both. God chooses and man chooses, and both are essential to the salvation equation. Those who reject will be condemned for their rejection, or as John would say it - they continue in their current state of condemnation.
All men are born in condemnation:
Joh 3:18 Whoever believes in him is not condemned, but whoever does not believe is condemned already, because he has not believed in the name of the only Son of God.
We all start there, and some move to reconciled.
January 23rd, 2007 at 1:56 pm
Tom,
thank you for your gracious responses- are you the same tom on steve gregg’s forum? Would love to get together and talk, it is rare to bring up these tough questions and not get into an emotional arguement and such.
jeremiah
January 23rd, 2007 at 2:08 pm
Jeremiah,
I completely agree with your sentiments. There is no reason for demeaning approaches to these difficult questions, and I’ve appreciated your comments as well. They are just really tough issues, and the stuff of which the greatest theologians of Church history have debated.
Generally I’m not too dogmatic on these matters because, while I’ve done a lot of thinking and teachiing on these themes, they remain sufficiently complicated and not something I want to create division over.
I don’t think I’m the Tom you are referring to on Steve Gregg’s forum. I formerly taught at Portland Bible College, from 1981 through 1993. Since that time I have made a departure from the IC, and have found my place in the simple house church model.
I look forward to future dialogues with you. My email address is tomlo7@yahoo.com if you ever want to talk outside of the blog.
Blessings
Tom
January 23rd, 2007 at 6:01 pm
So…if ‘faith’ is the ONLY way to please God, and faith is the substance of things ‘unseen’, how would seeing Him f2f and then saying, “Oh, okay, I see you with my own eyes now, so I believe in You….Uhhh, I guess I’ll accept that free gift you offered me now, please don’t send me to Hell….”
Nope. It doesn’t work for me, personally…:o)
Here’s a couple of meaty bones for ya to chaw on…*chuckle*
1) Is it possible for man to repent of his sins without God’s help? What if true repentance means turning ‘towards God’, not ‘away from sin’…if it were possible to quit sinning apart from the Holy Spirit, wouldn’t somebody throughout the vastness of humanity have gotten it right? ‘course, then we wouldn’t have needed a Savior in the first place…
2)What if the ’sin nature’ concept is a fallacy, a ‘doctrine of demons’? Isn’t the ‘nature’ of a thing it’s essence? Can you really change the nature of a thing? If we had a ’sin nature’, that could only sin, could we ever get saved, since our ’sin nature’ it would never make the choice to accept God’s grace….also, if we had a ’sin nature’ where did we get it? Did God create us with it in the beginning, when He looked upon all that He created and said “it is good”? Did He put it in Adam after he sinned?
Just a bit of info;
Almost every time ’sin nature’ is mentioned, you will find “i.e.,the flesh” now…the flesh is defined in every other mention in the Bible, as, well, ‘the flesh’–our earthly tent, created with natural drives and desires that are basically amoral until they are allowed to run amuck, resulting in ’sin’….
I look forward to gnawing with you….:o)
January 23rd, 2007 at 10:35 pm
Hungry writes,
I’ll never forget the day a great thinker, theologian, teacher, and overall amazing man of God - Ern Baxter (then around 75 years old) - in a Chapel at PBC shared with all of us “The entire notion of man having a sin nature has no biblical support. A dog has a dog nature, a fish has a fish nature, and human has a human nature. In Paul’s theology, the issue is never that man has a “sin nature,” but rather, that man has a problem with “sin in his flesh.”"
As a current teacher of the book of Romans, at PBC, I sat back in my chair, and watched the lights come on in my spirit. I couldn’t wait to get back to my office and rethink especially Romans 6 and 7 from Ern’s perspective.
Over the years I have found it perfectly fits the the text.
So, man is not sinful in his nature, but rather, he is born with sin in his flesh, and thus necessitates a Savior’s salvation. We are unable to remove “sin in the flesh,” but Jesus’ salvation can provide a perfect righteousness for us even while sin still resides in our flesh, necessitating His death, burial, and resurrection, and having received that righteousness by faith He deposits His Spirit within us to teach us to allow Him to control that sin in the flesh.
It has changed everything for me.
It made sense out of Paul’s words in Romans 7:
Rom 7:17 So now it is no longer I who do it, but sin that dwells within me.
Rom 7:18 For I know that nothing good dwells in me, that is, in my flesh. For I have the desire to do what is right, but not the ability to carry it out.
January 24th, 2007 at 5:58 am
‘Scrupe wrote:
Hungry blathered:
Looks like seeing and believing worked for Thomas.
John 20:29 KJV Jesus saith unto him, Thomas, because thou hast seen me, thou hast believed: blessed are they that have not seen, and yet have believed.
More ’see and believe’:
John 6:40 KJV And this is the will of him that sent me, that every one which seeth the Son, and believeth on him, may have everlasting life: and I will raise him up at the last day.
John 11:45 KJV Then many of the Jews which came to Mary, and had seen the things which Jesus did, believed on him.
…
To be honest, I don’t think there is anyone who has ever come to belief in Jesus who didn’t see / experience Him first in some tangible way - whether it be dream, vision, deliverance, confirmation of the Spirit, etc. We credit the apostles with such great faith, but THEY SAW Him, walked with Him, witnessed every miracle He did and were there on hand for His resurrection … sister, that’s SEEING and believing. No faith in that, IF your definition of faith is believing without seeing. So, apparently God is NOT pleased with the apostles by your definition.
Now, 2000 years later, how do people ’see’ Jesus in order to believe? Jesus presence here is in His sons and daughters, in whom He dwells - supposedly, in His Church … yet how many people in this world, instead of experiencing Jesus in us, or Jesus in His Church, have experienced only religious hogwash?
A sobering thought - it is said “judgment begins in the house of God” … Might judgment of a typical ‘christian’ look like this? Jesus says: “there was too much of you in the way for Me to be seen through you - Oh, they may have caught a glimpse of Me in you on rare occasion, but most of the time, they just saw and heard your flesh … your grumbling, your fault finding, your religious ignorance, etc.”
In that light, I fear judgment will not go well for ‘christians’.
Scrupe
January 24th, 2007 at 7:58 am
*amazed* You should have heard what my 8 year old said when I told him someone seemed to think that they could actually wait until after they died and saw God f2f to accept the gift of salvation….
Personally, I am speechless…..
I ‘really’ hope you are just trying to mess with my mind…..:o)
January 24th, 2007 at 8:39 am
Your 8 year old said what you’ve taught him to say. If you’d raised him Buddhist I’m sure his response would have been appropriate to that as well.
Someone walking their Christian walk purely on faith, without any sort of direct interaction with God sounds like maybe they don’t actually know God.
January 24th, 2007 at 8:55 am
My 8 year old is taught what the Word of God says…
Hebrews 9:27
…it is appointed for men to die once, but after this the judgment
note it does not say, “after men die, they will stand before almighty God and have one last chance to ‘believe in Him’ and avoid the eternal consequencs of their sins, as well as of denying Christ.”
January 24th, 2007 at 9:00 am
Once again Hungry…you missed the point *sigh*
Oh well, at least you play the game.
January 24th, 2007 at 9:01 am
By you. I fail to see the relevence.
January 24th, 2007 at 9:18 am
Hungry, could you be confusing ‘faith’ faith the free gift of ’salvation’, or at least blurring the lines there?
Remember, it is written: while we were yet enemies (sinners), Christ died for us (Romans 5:8), therefore, no part of our salvation is based upon God’s ‘pleasure’ with us. Salvation is offered to His enemies - to a people who are hostile to Him - rebellious, offensive to His holiness in every way … being ‘pleased’ with us comes only after we are IN Jesus, whereupon He sees us as sons of God IN His Son.
Faith apart from Christ is not possible. If we are IN Christ, it is Christ’s faith that is imputed TO us - for to be IN Christ is to be clothed / covered with Christ. Apart from Christ there is NO way God could be pleased with me. Therefore, to me, faithfulness is ONLY through re-birth, being IN Christ.
I know FICM doesn’t agree with me, and Tom expressed disagreement too - but have a real close look at Matthew 25:31-46 - the peoples of the ‘nations’ (which by Biblical definition are unbelievers) who are judged to be ’sheep’, they confess with their mouths at judgment before Christ that THEY DO NOT KNOW CHRIST. They ask Him “when did we ever see you?!?” Yet, Christ says “because you showed love for THESE BROHERS OF MINE, I receive it as LOVE FOR ME” and so they are given life / admitted to the Kingdom for loving Christ BY PROXY (loving the brothers of Christ in whom Christ dwells, but NOT loving/confessing in Christ DIRECTLY). Argue what you will, that is what the scripture says, and that is the picture scripture paints.
There is NO argument that can be made that those ’sheep of the nations’ were card-carrying evangelicals, or that they were ‘born again’ having uttered the ’sinners prayer’ in this life, for IF they were already saved and IN Christ, why were they not counted among the “brothers of Christ”? They simply do not know Christ directly, yet Christ justifies them for no more than showing love to His brothers.
January 24th, 2007 at 9:50 am
*grin* You got that right……
Matthew 18:3
and said, “Assuredly, I say to you, unless you are converted and become as little children, you will by no means enter the kingdom of heaven…
ahh…the simple faith of a child….
Not polluted by doctrine, theologies, dogmas, ‘Bible colleges’;
Not trying to impress others with their great knowledge, their ’spiritual prowess’ their lofty thought processes;
able to just read God’s Word, believe what it says about everything and walk in truth….
January 24th, 2007 at 10:18 am
No hungry. I’m not going to allow you to twist my words.
A child can sometimes have wonderful insight in a situation due to their simplistic view of life. This only goes so far, however. While my child might remind me that my TV won’t turn on because it’s not plugged in, I don’t want her changing my transmission.
Back to the point. Your child (I assume) speaks English. This is because your child has watched you and tried to emulate you in every way possible.
Using your child to support your own argument is silly.
I’m afraid this tangent is distracting from the original topic, so I’ll bow out now.
Sorry everyone.