Re: [TruthTalk] Basis of Unity (Bill)

[Judy Taylor]

On Mon, 7 Feb 2005 10:57:35 -0700 "Bill Taylor" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>writes: BT: 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?   jt: My question is how are you so sure? Scripture does not address where babies/children go to validate the above. Shouldn't we be silent where the scripture is silent? If the above is so then why isn't it clear?  Matt 18 and Matt 19 hint that children are saved but here Jesus is speaking to Israel God's Covenant ppl and under the old covenant children were judged by their behavior and parents were held responsible until the age of accountability. Also when a family was judged, under the old covenant their children and belongings went down with them.   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:   jt: I've read Peace Child by Don Richardson <snip> This one sounds interesting and Peace Child was excellent, especially since it came from a Canadian :).   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?   jt: Well Proverbs tells us that God's wisdom dances in the streets saying "come in here" and we know from Romans that God gives  everyone a conscience wherein dwells a natural awareness that there is a God only most prefer the darkness they are living in and few search for Him, or if they do begin to search the devil is quick to come up with carnal substitutes that appeal to the flesh.   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).   jt: It is the Spirit in conjunction with the Word, if there is no Word preached then the Holy Spirit has nothing to work with. The person must make a choice using his own volition - what the Holy Spirit does is shut down the traffic and distraction in their mind giving peace for a measure of time so that they can do this.  The Church has been given the ministry of reconciliation and is obligated to the sinner.  Our message should be one of righteousness, self control, and the judgment to come.  Any problem with this??   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?   jt: His children are ONLY those already in Christ - Cultural roots are pagan without exception and the ppl caught up in Mohammedism, Buddhism, Hinduism, Animism, Polytheism, and every other ism you can imagine are walking in darkness and are ignorant of the covenants of grace.    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.   jt: Salvation is an ongoing work of grace which is past, present, and future - Saying it has already been accomplished is error because it is a salvation that is  "ready to be revealed at the last day" (1 Pet 1:5)    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?   jt: If I were presented with both Bill and were still in darkness and ignorance I'd go for yours because the way I read it, you can't lose.  He does the doing and I do the receiving. However, it's too late now because I've spent so much time searching the Word myself and I have read 1 Pet 4:18 "And if the righteous SCARCELY BE SAVED, where shall the ungodly and the sinner appear?" So that's blown it for me.   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?   jt: They wouldn't Bill. I would much rather hear your version than Izzys.  Only there is no fear of God in it. Don't ppl need to know what they are being saved from?  Don't they need to be aware that if they do not have a LOVE for the truth that God Himself will send them strong delusion? This past Sunday the pastor at our Church told the ppl that he had been hired by the elders to tell us all how bad we are and he is trying his best to do a good job.   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).   jt: The Spirit of Truth works with God's Word rather than the ideas and doctrines of men. Should we speculate as to where anyone goes (including babies and children) when we don't really know?  We can stay with what we do know that God is a loving Heavenly Father and that we can trust Him by faith to do what is right.   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.   jt: These mysteries have now been revealed to us ie: The first is the mystery of godliness "Christ in you the hope of glory"; and the mystery of iniquity is "antichrist in you by his spirit" (Eph 2) which is how we came into this world and what necessitates our being born anew.   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.   jt: There are two sides to God's nature Bill and from my perspective you appear to completely ignore one of them.   judyt