Announcements...

[chess]

I think that I might have given some people here some wrong impressions in the past. So, I'd just like to clear a few things up.
1. I am a Christian.
2. This means that I believe in one God, who expresses Himself as a Trinity of people - God the Father, God the Son, and the Holy Spirit.
3. This also means that I believe all other gods/godesses/deities-of-any-description are fakes, invented by humans or by Satan to trap people and keep them away from God.
4. In addition, I believe that everyone who isn't a Christian is going to Hell.
5. Understandably, I would really rather all you people didn't go to Hell. Hence, I'm praying for you. And I'm going to keep praying for you. Even if you ask me not to.

So, there we go.

Comments

[passage.livejournal.com]

This question gets asked a lot actually. I must have come across it at least 3 times in just a last couple of weeks.

So before I answer it (or rather, give my opinion on it, Michelle may have a different answer), I'm going to rant.

Why do people ask this question so much? Have any of them not heard about Jesus? Have you ever met anyone, just one, who'd not heard of Christianity?
Just once?
Is this question, infact, in any way, remotly relavent to ... anything?
Then why does everyone seem to want to ask it?!?!?

Right, now that I've ranted, onto the more useful bit:

During my answer I'm going to quote bits of the bible, I appeciate you may not believe what it says, but I think your question is about what Christian's think, and so I think the bible is useful in showing both that what I present is not just my wacky ravings (I hope) whilst at the same time giving some idea of why I (or hopefully we) believe it.

Have I lost you in brackets yet?

Good, then I'll begin.

"Abram[1] believed the Lord and he credited it to him as righteousness". Genisis 15v6 (Quoted in Romans 4v3, I mention this in case you're wondering if that had somehow passed away).

Now, from that passage (and the rest of the bible) I don't think there's any doubt that Abraham is headed for/is in (this depends on how you try and align time in this world and with God, personally I think the correct approach is: don't bother trying) heaven. But he didn't know Jesus (for the good reason that Jesus hadn't come to earth yet[2]).

However, Abraham knew God, he saw God in creation and he worshipped him, he had faith in God and in this passage it's clearly stated that that was enough for God.

Not that our faith can in some way make us clean, not that we can earn God's approval by ourselves, but that that faith opens up the way for redemption by Jesus sacrifice, without having to actually know Jesus.

One of the elders of my church said to me recently "I wouldn't say this in a sermon or something, because I think it could be too easily misunderstood, but I won't be surprised if in heaven I find people who on earth didn't know about Jesus, but saw God in creation, and worshipped him."[3]

So, what of this elusive bunch who have never heard of Jesus, who live before that time, or the babies who were aborted?

Well I think that God will judge them fairly and rightly, and that a simple honest faith in him, without any fnacy details or knowledge of the crucifiction will be adaquete to get them into heaven.

However, this is totally irrelavent for you. Because you do know about Christianity, and you have heard the gospel, and so has everyone you know. 'Simple faith'[4] means nothing in that context: either you've accepted Jesus or you've rejected him[5].

So, in concluson: God will judge them fairly, this is absolutly irrelavent for you.

If you made it this far then congratulations

Neil, who's wondering if there's a "most comments longer than the original post" award.

Numbered footnotes are expanded in the following comment, as I went over the character limit in this one.

Footnotes for the preceeding post

[passage.livejournal.com]

[1] Later Abraham: God gave Abraham a new name as a sign of his covenant with, and approval of, Abraham.
[2] Not an error in timing, the bible says:
"You see, at just the right time, when we were still powerless, Christ died for the ungodly." Romans 5v6
[3] For completness it should be noted that there are many stories of such people, usually they have a vision from God to which they respond, and lo and behold a confused looking Christian missionary turns up on their remote island wondering why God has told them to come here. (To be scientifically sound I ought to note that we tend not to know the stories of those who find God, but someone doesn't turn up to explain the gospel, simply from their deffintion: that they are remote and have no contact with the rest of the world. Personally I don't see that as a problem).
[4] I should clarify what I mean by 'simple faith' in this context. I mean the person who has never heard of Jesus, the kind your question is about. I think that a 'simple faith' in other meanings, can be a wonderful, powerful, and very godly thing.
[5] Alright, there are agnostics too, and I suspect they count as rejecting him but I'm not sure, fortunatly several people will probably comment giving their opinions so maybe I can work out mine from there too ;-)

Re: Footnotes for the preceeding post

[chess]

Uhm, I remember a passage about God saying He would 'spit the lukewarm from [His] mouth', or some such, as the day of judgement drew near.

*looks at bible.gospelcom.net*

Aha, that'd be Revelation 3:16, then.

Re: Footnotes for the preceeding post

[marnanel.livejournal.com]

Though that's addressed to Christians.

Re: Footnotes for the preceeding post

[chess]

True, but I couldn't think of any directly relavent examples off the top of my head. Feel free to do better :).

Re: Footnotes for the preceeding post

[passage.livejournal.com]

That's a letter to a church however, and is for people who have known about Jesus, but aren't changing their lives because of it.

And this is wrong, academic knowledge of Jesus doesn't mean much in salvation terms. (Paul: "work out your salvation with fear and trembling").

However, this debate is about people who have never heard of Jesus.

And I think God is still looking for people passionate about him, to say "I think there's a God" and just leave it at that isn't enough. It is specifically Abraham's response to God, his faith, that the bible says makes him 'right with God' (to paraphrase slightly).

So, that all said I'm not sure I completely understand the point you're making.

I do agree that being Christian is much better than not knowing about Jesus atall.

What do you think will happen to those people who have never heard about Jesus, through no fault of their own?

Neil

[originalauthor.livejournal.com]

Thank you for your response. You're right that I'm asking what a Christian believes (in this case Chess, but I asked the question generally in my own journal (http://www.livejournal.com/talkread.bml?journal=originalauthor&itemid=29695&nc=1)) and I'm not worried about what I believe, or whether you've convinced me, or my own salvation. Just wanted to know what the Christian position is.

Your basic position is that people in remote tribes will find God talking to them through nature, through His works, or through other signs and wonders, and even if your missionary never shows up, God will judge them according to their reception to that, am I paraphrasing properly?

(and, incidentally, know I don't know anyone who hasn't heard of Christianity, except obviously there are many, I just happen to live in the US where they probably are very few).

If I'm paraphrasing properly (please let me know), then 1) does that contradict Chess's original assertion that "everyone who isn't a Christian is going to Hell"? and 2) if there are deeply religious people in Arab countries who because of surrounding cultures have never been taught Christianity, but who believe that Islam is God's way of speaking to them, and they are devout to Islam, do you believe they are safe?

Oh, and the question of why is this relevant. Some people think that a claim that everyone who doesn't follow a certain religion seems to many who don't follow that religion to be hopelessly naive of the fact that many have never heard of that religion, and we are searching for consistency and fairness in that religion, and how its followers justify both. That's all.

[chess]

1) Not really - 'everyone' was a dramatic statment covering 'everyone who's likely to read this post'; it was directed to the post's audience, rather than a completely literal thing for every exceptional case.
2) I have to admit I don't know. My gut reaction is 'no', my considered response is 'possibly, but not many Muslims *are* ignorent of Christianity, because mostly they're taught to hate it'.

[passage.livejournal.com]

That's not completely fair.

Well, okay, I don't know a lot about Muslims in so called 'Muslim countries', but I do know that that's not atall true for Muslims in this country (or at least, if they were taugt to hate it then the ones I know are downright rebellious on this point).

However, the Koran (sp?) does refer to the bible (and, I think, Christians) as a further source of information, so it would be hard to be a devout muslim and yet know nothing of Christianity[1]

Neil

[1] I absolutly refuse point blank to start a debate about how much about Christianity you have to know before you discount salvation by the 'simple faith' I suggested in my previous comment.

[chess]

I guess the only accounts I hear of Muslims in Muslim countries are the ones where they're making trouble for Christians, so my news sources are a bit biased. But still, there's enough of them that it must be a fairly widespread thing.

Salvation through ignorance?

[passage.livejournal.com]

First of all I owe you an apology, for my rant, it was out of place.

The question is a good question, and a valid question (for the reasons you gave). I guess I reacted the way I did because I've heard it too often.

Or perhaps more likely because I don't have a good answer for it.

The problem is this: I am trying in my answer to balence two truths (you might want to call them beliefs instead, they are things I am convinced of at least):
- There is no Salvation except through Jesus's sacrifice [1]
- God is a just judge [2]

Now in a sense, being strictly mainline Christianity that's about all I can, with absolute certainty (in my own heart at least) say. The bible doesn't tell me how God will judge those who never had a chance to get to know him, through no fault of their own.

In a sense that's because I don't need to know: I'm not going to be asked to judge them.

However, academically, as you say, it's a question we'd like an answer to.

So, I have to admit that the rest is my thoughts and that other Christian's might feel differently on it. Before writting this I did talk to a couple of Christians to ask if they felt I was way of base (thanks for your advice guys), but what I'm about to say I can't prove from the bible, it's just my best guess.

When I was very young I asked this question and my parents gave me a simplfied answer:
"I think God will judge them according to whether they would have accepted Jesus had they known about him."

Now that is a simplification (well, it may be the entire truth, but I don't have good reason to suppose it is), but I think it captures the spirit of the idea.

I think these people are redeemed by Jesus' sacrifice even if they don't know or understand that. (This is the way I try and handle the apparent opposition between the two 'axioms'[3] as it were, that I've stated).

So to answer you:
Your praphrase it pretty much dead on, I'm going to tweak a couple of words: mostly pedantism.

Your basic position is that people in remote tribes may find God talking to them through nature, through His works, or through other signs and wonders, and even if your missionary never shows up, God will judge them according to their reception to that, am I paraphrasing properly?"

"If I'm paraphrasing properly (please let me know), then 1) does that contradict Chess's original assertion that "everyone who isn't a Christian is going to Hell"?"

Okay, yes. Now Michelle's statement must, from a pedantic viewpoint be false (Abraham turns up in a scene set in heaven in a story by Jesus[4], he can't be a Christian living 4,000 years before Christ).

But I must emphasise: this is an exception rather than a rule.
No, that's too strong: I suspect that this is an exception rather than a rule.

Point 2 of yours in that paragraph has I think been answered in another branch of this thread so I will only add one bit:
"do you believe they are safe?"

Safe? No. They have no assurance of salvation (Islam doesn't even offer this to it's followers). I trust that God will judge them justly, but I don't know where that will put them. I hope some of them will end up in heaven, but I don't *know*.

I hope I've not confused the issue too much,
Neil

[1] John 14v16b:
"No one comes to the Father except through me."
Also: Romans 3:22-30
[2] Deuteronomy 32v4:
He is the Rock, his works are perfect,
and all his ways are just.
A faithful God who does no wrong,
upright and just is he.
Also: Psalm 45:6,Isaiah 5:16, Isaiah 30:18, Luke 18:7-8
[3] Alright, so they're not really axioms .. postulates perhaps?
[4] Luke 16v22-23:
"The time came when the beggar died and the angels carried him to Abraham's side. The rich man also died and was buried. In hell, where he was in torment, he looked up and saw Abraham far away, with Lazarus by his side."
There are several other such referances in Luke (see Luke 13).
It is possible that Jesus is using Abraham's presence as a sign of being with God (abraham being with God, as the jews would have understood it). I think this involves Abraham actually being there, if you're concerned this is just a metaphor say and I'll take a closer look at the passages involved.

Re: Salvation through ignorance?

[originalauthor.livejournal.com]

Fair enough. Thanks for the thoughts. I think your parents had a pretty wise answer to a difficult quandary. Surely God could judge how they *would have* reacted. But since in many cases we can't help being who we are, is that in itself fair?

Wish I had more time for this discussion. I'm at work now, and have schoolwork besides. :(

[b-weg.livejournal.com]

Methinks quoting from the Bible will win you no ground with non-Christian non-Jewish people, since it has no more significance to them than other books.

Oh, and three non-overlapped, non-consecutive sets of brackets rarely lose anyone.

[Oh, and of course this question comes up a lot - it's a discussion-provoking and important one]

[chess]

Surely quoting from the Bible is precisely the correct thing to do, when the question is 'what do Christians believe about X' (where X in this case happens to be what happens to ppl who have no chance to know about God).

[originalauthor.livejournal.com]

You're absolutely right Chess. I asked what Christians felt about it, and I expected Bible verses. That was the point of the question.

Re:

[b-weg.livejournal.com]

Mmmm... but non-Christians don't consider The Bible to be a significant book. Besides, in a post with 60-odd replies, I for one would be likely to skip dense textual analyses.

[chess]

So, you think curt, flippant, 'because I do' replies are a better way of going about a rational, informed discussion?

Never mind, the actual target audience of those posts has said that the approach was right.

Re:

[b-weg.livejournal.com]

I never implied that at all, and there are few answers worse than 'because I do'. Worry not - I shall not reply again to this conversation.

Fair points

[passage.livejournal.com]

All fair points, sorry about the brackets. And I think you're right about the nature of the question (sorry about my rant).

You're right in that the bible quotes aren't going to convinced Non-Christians that what I'm saying is true. In part my reason was this:
To provided a basis for debate with other Christians and as a disipline for myself: I'm trying to get to know my bible better and I ought to be checking that what I argue is supported by the bible (and it would be fair to accuse me of failing in this regard in that some of what I said was speculation, and I don't think I highlighted this as much as I should have).

And what Chess said too.

Neil