In part two of this series, I talked about Romans 1:18-21 where Paul claims that everyone can know God from nature. But this doesn’t seem to be quite enough because, as I said in part one, you need to get from God to The Jesus of The Bible in order to be saved. And, despite a valient attempt by the Greeks with Dionysus, it seems darn near impossible to do this — at least to the Christian’s satisfaction. And indeed it must be because Paul writes in Romans 10:13-17
… for “whoever will call on the name of the Lord will be saved.” How then will they call on Him in whom they have not believed? How will they believe in Him whom they have not heard? And how will they hear without a preacher? How will they preach unless they are sent? Just as it is written, “how beautiful are the feet of those who bring good news of good things!” However, they did not all heed the good news; for Isaiah says, “Lord, who has believed our report?” So faith comes from hearing, and hearing by the word of Christ.
So where does that leave the billions of people who, because of where and when they were born, have never heard the name of Jesus? And doesn’t this put the fate of all these souls on the hands of every Christian? Well, yes, but …
Some Christians have no qualms about sending billions of people to Hell. A professor of New Testament, Ethics, and Philosophy at a Baptist Theological Seminary with whom I had a brief email exchange a few years ago told me straight out: “God may do with us just as he pleases.” He was referring to Romans 9 where in verses 20-23 Paul says
On the contrary, who are you, O man, who answers back to God? The thing molded will not say to the molder, “Why did you make me like this,” will it? Or does not the potter have a right over the clay, to make from the same lump one vessel for honorable use and another for common use? What if God, although willing to demonstrate His wrath and to make His power known, endured with much patience vessels of wrath prepared for destruction? And He did so to make known the riches of His glory upon vessels of mercy, which He prepared beforehand for glory
Paul seems to be saying that God created some people knowing full well they’d end up in Hell. But, what the hell, He’s God, right? Of course, this opens up the whole predestination v free-will issue which I am not going to delve into right now. My point is that some Christians are fine with a Hell kind of like Monaco and a Heaven kind of like Greenland. (Hint … Manoco is the most densely populated country and Greenland is the least populated country.) Of course, aside from the guaranteed 50-acre lot in Heaven, the other advantage to this viewpoint is that it’s more or less out of your hands — your evangelical hands, that is. If God created some people knowing they’d end up in Heaven, they’re gonna get there, right? Whether I tell them about Jesus or not, they are gonna get there. And those who were created to be kindling, no matter how much you preach to them they are beyond hope.
Fair enough, but what about the Maya people who lived before even Columbus sailed the ocean blue? Can God, a God of Love, really condemn them all? My seminary pen-pal says yes. God can create entire civilizations knowing that they don’t stand a snowball’s chance in … hell. He is, after all, a God that is 100% just (apparently just trumps love) and those Mayas just didn’t get it right and didn’t say the right prayers and didn’t believe the right thing. They must be punished in accordance with God’s Law. Ignorantia juris non excusat, afterall. Quite a cavalier attitude for someone who had the luck to be born in the right place at the right time!
All this “God is 100% just” talk is just fine except that God, apparently, does have the ability to go against his nature. There is a loophole in the Law. Apparently, God doesn’t send little babies to Hell. Whew! That’s a relief. That would be just downright cruel and unusual. I mean, those cute little babies don’t deserve eternal damnation just because they are unable to hear about Jesus Christ and are unable to make a conscious decision to follow Jesus. Who cares that the Bible says they take part in the “total depravity of man” and are stained by “original sin” and are “conceived in sin”. They don’t deserve Hell!
But, aren’t the Maya of the 9th century, for example, in the same boat? Aren’t they unable to make a conscious decision about … about … what’s his name? Exactly. They never heard!
But don’t give up. There are other Christians who, perhaps like you, don’t sit well with God sending all those wrong-place-wrong-timers to Hell. How do they get around it? Do they let God chill out a bit and offer some free passes? No. They still insist that God be 100% just but they don’t want people condemned who never had the chance to hear. So what do they do? A little presto-chango … a little abracadabro … and a lot of stay tuned …
Sphere: Related Content
Hi Ken,
God is Just. It is also true that God has the right to condemn entire civilizations to hell but the bible is there to teach us about God’s character and I don’t think that idea totally fits with His character.
There are only two ways presented in the bible to get to heaven - the old covenant and then its replacement, the new covenant.
Is there any suggestion that Abraham, Isaac and Jacob, Noah, Joseph and all the others who died before the Law was given are going to be sent to hell? Not at all.
For those who have never heard of the covenant there is clearly grace providing they recognize God through the beauty of His creation and obey the consciences he gives them.
Romans 2:12-16
God is good. He is not evil. There are many things about ultimate justice that we simply cannot comprehend because we are not God and i think we try to put God in a box based on our own, human, understanding of justice and love.
Thanks for your comments, Peter.
First of all, I whole heartedly agree that “we try to put God in a box based on our own, human, understanding of justice and love.” In my opinion, many arguments against God brought by atheists are of exactly this form — “I don’t think God should or would or … do this or that.” How do we know wht God woulda shoulda coulda?
In regards to this post and your comments, much of my thinking comes from the teaching that Jesus replaced the old covenant and Paul often talks about not being under the Law any more. Plus, many Christians will emphatically say that Jesus is the only way based on Jesus’ words: “I am the way …”
So, you do offer that “middle way,” so to speak, that so many times is not seen in our black-and-white world. Namely that if you’ve heard of Jesus then you are judged on your acceptance of him; if you haven’t heard of Jesus then you are judge on your keeping your own “moral standard” as Josh McDowell says.
This makes sense and I can get this from the Romans passage but given God’s justness I don’t see it practically working because no one is going to keep their own moral standard or any law derived from nature because everyone sins. So, for this to be a viable solution, God must relax his requirement of being perfect and accept almost. And most Christians, I think, will vehemently oppose this.
Paul, himself, even says that “I do what I don’t want to do and don’t do what I do want to do” so how can anyone “do by nature things required by the law”? It’s against our very nature to obey the law!
True, true.
However, is it not the attitude of our hearts which is important?
Many people confess with their mouths that they are ‘Christians’ but don’t really believe it in their hearts. Many want fire insurance but don’t want that whole ‘repentance’ thing.
I don’t see that God has to relax His standards at all to to say to someone ‘You heard creation calling out my name and you recognized the sound. You saw creation and recognized the creator. You felt your conscience convicting you of right and wrong and resolved to live by what is right, even if you screwed up sometimes - and I will honor that.’
The law shows us our sin. Our repentance brings us to Christ. We don’t have to know His name (or any of His names) to recognize our sin and to be repentant.
I am no theologian and no scholar and I also know I am not God and that He looks at and judges our hearts, which I can’t do.
We know that the heavens declare the glory of God. Many people see that but reject Him out of the evil in their hearts. Others see it and choose to accept Him yet are still unwilling to turn from their wicked ways. Others still see, believe and turn. We have the gospel, the good news and it is our responsibility to take that good news to all nations, to lay out the need for salvation and help them recognize and turn from their sins.
I believe that God is loving enough to accept those who have repented in their hearts even though they have never heard the name Jesus but that it is very hard in our sinful state for us to do that without hearing the Word.
If there are nations who still have not heard, is that God’s fault? We have been commissioned to go into all the world. If we do not answer His call, is that God’s fault or should it be on our heads?
When you have God saying “You heard creation calling out my name …” is this the Christian God of the Bible or Zeus or Shiva or Quetzalcoatl or …? Haven’t most (all?) civilizations seen god(s) in creation? Yet the common Christian viewpoint is that all these civilizations are, in fact, hell bound. Even though they found God, it wasn’t the right God; it wasn’t The God of The Bible.
If a religion that is not based on the Christian Bible has people living a “good” life and repenting from evil, is that good enough? What if, as with Dionysus, this religion has a god who sacrifices himself for us yet he is not named Jesus Christ, is that good enough?
You seem to say that this is all ok but then back off a bit by saying “but … it is very hard … without hearing the Word.”
One of the points I’m trying to make in these posts is that, within the common Christian viewpoint, the “safety net” that exists for people who are, for whatever reason, unable to hear about Jesus Christ does not work. God being “visible” from creation still relies on getting to the Christian God, specifically, and does not allow for any other religion or god.
Furthermore, I see absolutely no evidence of this actually working for anyone — not even in the Bible. The Bible has no examples of anyone coming to God or Jesus without hearing about God or Jesus from someone. That is why I claim this is merely a rationalization to make Christians feel better; to allow them to put blame on the “heathen” for actively rejecting God.
The other “safety net” — that if you are sincere enough in your quest for (the Christian) God then God will send someone to preach to you — is occasionally employed in the Bible but somehow didn’t work for Buddha or Mohammed, among others. And to say that these two men were not sincere enough is, in my opinion, to say that no one could ever be sincere enough. Hence, this, too, seems to be another rationalization that let’s Christians blame the “heathen” and not God or themselves.
I absolutely agree with the added stipulation that it is also not the fault of the person who has not heard. Christians are to blame for any one who does not hear about Jesus Christ and ends up in Hell because 1) as you said, there is a commission to “go into all the world” and 2) Christians (a sweeping generalization, I know, so exclude yourself if you don’t feel this way) are so against other religions that they don’t allow any other alternative to Christianity. It’s Christianity’s God or nothing and the only way to Christianity’s God is by hearing.
Thanks Ken,
You have a well thought out and very interesting point-of-view and make a fairly convincing argument.
Thank you.
I am enjoying reading your blog.
Sincerley,
Peter