Re: [TruthTalk] Basis of Unity

[Bill Taylor]

----- Original Message ----- From: ShieldsFamily To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org Sent: Sunday, February 06, 2005 2:47 PM Subject: RE: [TruthTalk] Basis of Unity     Judy wrote  >   However, we are supposed to grow out of it (that's if we are part of the real Church); contrary to what some claim we are not just sucked up into Christ because we have not refused the incarnation.   If this is a backhanded reference to me, Judy, you have missed the point. Please observe the terms I use more closely, and then have the integrity, when referencing me, to apply them the way I do. I have never said anything about the Church being populated by "osmosis," exclusion coming only to those who have refused our Lord. God was in Christ reconciling the world to himself, but the world was not made the Church in the atonement: Paul says, "therefore be reconciled to God." The Church universal is made up of those who have not only not rejected Jesus Christ but have themselves believed the good news of their salvation and received the gift of the Holy Spirit. Local churches may be frequented by "non-believers" of varying degrees, and this for different reasons, but the "Church" itself is populated by believers.   Bill     Izzy wrote  >  When Judy said that it made me think of the Torrance theology stuff, but not specifically of you.    BT: For the record, neither of the Torrance brothers (T.F. and J.B.) make the claim that Judy attributed to the "some" of her reference. Perhaps I have failed to communicate this clearly over the months. For that I apologize. ___________________________________    Izzy wrote   >   Which is why I am writing: Do you really mean that you don�t think everyone is saved if they have not refused Christ?  This is real news to me.  I thought you believed that everyone was universally saved UNLESS they refused Christ after hearing the gospel.    BT: And I thought we were talking about the "Church," Izzy. The Church is made up of believers. This does not mean that there are not many people who are saved who do not believe. There are millions and millions, maybe billions of young children, for instance, who do not "believe" in Jesus Christ. They are not members of the church, per se, nor have they received the gift of the Holy Spirit, yet this does not mean that they are not "saved." They are saved. If they die, they will spend eternity with the Lord. They are saved because of what he has done for humanity, themselves included, and not because of anything they have or have not done themselves. If at some point, when they are able, they reject Christ, then they will need to repent, which means they will need to change their mind and believe in him, or they will be lost and remain so. But they are not lost until they reject Christ, and they do not go to hell unless the remain in that state of rejection. More to the point, however, they become members of the Church when they believe the good news of their salvation. Now, do you disagree with this? __________________________________   Izzy wrote  >  That�s why I asked you some time ago why on earth you would want to preach the gospel to anyone if that�s the only thing that could condemn them to hell.    BT: I do not know for sure what constitutes rejection, Izzy. I know the pertinent passages -- or maybe I should say the passages which have been deemed pertinent -- but I am not persuaded that the contemporary interpretations of those passages necessarily convey their original intent. I will admit that it is perhaps possible to reject Christ without ever hearing his name. But if this is so, then I do not understand it.   By the way, have you (or Judy, or anyone else for that matter) ever read the book by Don Richardson entitled Eternity in Their Hearts: Startling Evidence of Belief in the One True God in Hundreds of Cultures Throughout the World (Regal Books, 1984)? In it Richardson shares stories from missionaries of people groups who had been prepared by God to hear the Gospel before any Christians had even arrived to witness to them. One tribe said that they were sure that a light-skinned messenger would come someday to tell about the Son of God. So sure were they that this messenger was coming, they had appointed people to watch for him. This paved the way for the actual missionaries to share Christ with them, which was accepted eagerly. Other examples are of people who had lost a "Book," and were waiting for someone to restore it to them. Another example relates to Acts 17, where Paul preached on Mars Hill to the Greeks about the unknown God. Richardson goes back prior to the Acts account to tell a story about Epimenides and his suggestion to the leaders of Athens to sacrifice certain "dedicated" sheep to ask an "unknown God" from another culture to cure Athens of a deadly plague, and this after the Greeks had, to no avail, offered atoning sacrifices to all of the gods that they had.    Richardson's is a very interesting, informative, and thought provoking read. If you haven't read it, I think you would like it very much. (BTW, parts of the preceding paragraph was adapted from a review of the book on Amazon.com)   My point is that God seems to prepare people in advance to hear the Good News of Jesus Christ, so that when it comes to them, they are ready to receive him. I wonder if God reveals the same about himself to those who will not be hearing the Gospel in their lifetimes? This seems like a pertinent question to me, considering that many thousands (millions? billions?) of people have died without having had the opportunity to hear about Jesus Christ. What do you think?   Izzy, if I understand you correctly, you believe that every person (except perhaps a little child) who does not put his or her faith in Jesus Christ will upon dying be judged and sent to hell, and that this is why it is so important that Christians reach each person with the Gospel, so that each may choose Christ for him- or herself. Am I correct about this?   And you agree with me that if once a person hears the Good News, s/he rejects it, that rejection, if unto death, will send him or her to hell. Am I correct?   May I suggest that the rest of my position is more gracious than yours?   If I understand you correctly, you think, as it pertains to my apprehension of Christ's atonement, that Christians would be crazy to "preach the gospel to anyone" because "that�s the only thing that could condemn them to hell." You think that I think people are on easy street until we Christians come along and present them with the ultimatum to believe or perish. Is this correct?   Izzy, allow me to iterate again that which I have stressed in the past, and this that you may at least be able to represent my position correctly when presenting it to others. It is the business of the Holy Spirit to bring people to faith. We both believe that no one would come to faith apart from the preparatory drawing of the Holy Spirit; for, as Jesus said, "No one can come to me unless the Father who sent me draws him; and I will raise him up at the last day" (Joh 6.44). It seems to me that we too easily forget in discussions like this that God is active in preparing people to receive his Good News. I become more and more persuaded that God has revealed himself in and through his Son to all his children throughout the world by planting a root for the Gospel within every culture, so when we who evangelize them call peoples to Christ, we are calling them to the deepest truths within their own cultures. It is humbling -- is in not -- to realize that God does not "need" humans to spread His Word, but rather has chosen to share this experience with us?   I am commissioned, as are you, Izzy, to go into the world and make disciples. Why is it so unorthodox to suggest -- nay, insist -- that the act of "saving" them has already been accomplished by our Lord? We "make" of that which has already been saved by Christ. And we do this via the work of the Holy Spirit and the Word of God as we minister to people's lives. It is God's pleasure that we do this; it is his business only to know why some refuse his Son in the face of what Christ has accomplished in their place and on their behalf. And while we do not understand this, it is nevertheless our privilege to be a part of his salvific economy.    May I ask you what I perceive to be a very pertinent question?  Why would you perceive that people are more likely to reject my version of the Gospel, if it is true, than they are to reject yours, if it is yours which is the truth? When I share the Gospel with people, I speak to them about the Trinity. I may not use the word, but I speak to them about our (theirs and my) loving God, our Father who has given us his Son that we might receive his Spirit to draw us to himself in prayerful communion, and I talk to them about Jesus Christ who died for us that we might be forgiven, receive the gift of sonship, and be led by the Holy Spirit into eternal life. I speak about Christ, our great high priest, touched with a feeling of our infirmities, that he might intercede for us, opening our hearts by his Spirit. And I pray with them, that they might know that we are one together in Christ, as he is one with his Father, our Father. Why if news so good is also true, would they be more likely to reject this than they would a message centered in hell fire and damnation? If my version is true, Izzy, then won't you please agree with me that the Spirit works in and through it, just as he would through yours, if yours should turn out to be the truth? It is not for me or you to speculate as to why those whom Christ has redeemed may reject him, yet some of them do (cf. 2Pet 2.1). Paul refers to this as the mystery of iniquity, the unfathomable truth that some will reject the One who saved them, irrational and incomprehensible as it seems.   And so, may I suggest again that my position is more gracious than yours? From where would such graciousness come, if not from our God? At least some(?) of those who do not hear my version of the Gospel will be saved, if they should die before hearing it. Yours will send to hell, those who die in ignorance, and this for no reason other than their having been born in the wrong place at the wrong time. Please consider what I am saying. ___________________________________ Izzy wrote  > Are you more �orthodox� than I think?   BT: I hope so :>)   Iz  > Like you agree that we need to hear the gospel and receive Christ as our Lord and Savior by repenting of our sins and following Him? Tell me it�s true��.Izzy   BT: It is true, Izzy, but not as a means of salvation.   Blessing,   Bill