FATE OF THE UNREACHED

[Mr GLee]

Am I correct in understanding you think the word "law" in the verse is all of God's laws as a whole and is not a reference specifically to the Law of Moses, and then, by extension, Paul is alluding to all of God's words, His entire revelation to humanity as recorded in what we now call the Bible?

Yes, the book of law to the letter death. (thou shall not) No philosophical theories as oral traditions.

 

[Mr GLee]

Makesends, here's a little more for you to consider. It can be said that those who deliberately sinned and disobeyed God and who lived lives of evil without the Law of Moses, will perish without the Law of Moses. They will perish without the Covenant of Jesus as well—not because they were unexposed to either Covenant, but because they deliberately and knowingly lived lives of evil, thus violating the “divine nature” God had revealed to them through creation.

To violate the word, they would say they have no sin no need for forgiveness hourly daily,

In that way when we sin it proves our nature. . dead no power to hear or do the will of God not seen

Two kinds of sinners saved and not redeemed

All sin and continue to fall short of His glory all the days of one's newborn again life. Forgiveness is needing every day, every hour

His kingdom does not come by looking as the temporal dying

1 John1:8 If we say that we have no sin, we deceive ourselves, and the truth is not in us.If we confess our sins, he is faithful and just to forgive us our sins, and to cleanse us from all unrighteousnes. If we say that we have not sinned, we make him a liar, and his word is not in us.

 

[David Lamb]

To violate the word, they would say they have no sin no need for forgiveness hourly daily,

In that way when we sin it proves our nature. . dead no power to hear or do the will of God not seen

Two kinds of sinners saved and not redeemed

All sin and continue to fall short of His glory all the days of one's newborn again life. Forgiveness is needing every day, every hour

His kingdom does not come by looking as the temporal dying

1 John1:8 If we say that we have no sin, we deceive ourselves, and the truth is not in us.If we confess our sins, he is faithful and just to forgive us our sins, and to cleanse us from all unrighteousnes. If we say that we have not sinned, we make him a liar, and his word is not in us.

I agree with most of what you wrote, but what do you mean by: " Two kinds of sinners saved and not redeemed"? Sinners can't be saved without being redeemed by Jesus Christ.

 

[Mr GLee]

I agree with most of what you wrote, but what do you mean by: " Two kinds of sinners saved and not redeemed"? Sinners can't be saved without being redeemed by Jesus Christ.

I was not saying two kinds of saved sinners .

All of dying mankind continue daily to fall short of the glory of the Father all the days of thier lives .

Some he gives mercy seasoned with grace.

 

[David Lamb]

I was not saying two kinds of saved sinners .

All of dying mankind continue daily to fall short of the glory of the Father all the days of thier lives .

Some he gives mercy seasoned with grace.

Ah! So you mean there are two kinds of sinners, saved sinners who are redeemed by Christ, and unsaved sinners who are not redeemed by Christ. If that's what you were saying, I agree. Sorry for not understanding you first time!

 

[Mr GLee]

Ah! So you mean there are two kinds of sinners, saved sinners who are redeemed by Christ, and unsaved sinners who are not redeemed by Christ. If that's what you were saying, I agree. Sorry for not understanding you first time!

Thanks that was kind .My writing skills I suffer

 

[Josheb]

Yes, the book of law to the letter death. (thou shall not) No philosophical theories as oral traditions.

Do you mean no subsequent oral traditions? The Pentateuch had previously been an oral tradition...... and tradition , holds Moses was directed by God to put into writing that which had been communicated by Him, communicated among God's people, for centuries prior to Moses putting it to pen and papyrus (or leather).

 

[makesends]

Makesends, here's a little more for you to consider. It can be said that those who deliberately sinned and disobeyed God and who lived lives of evil without the Law of Moses, will perish without the Law of Moses. They will perish without the Covenant of Jesus as well—not because they were unexposed to either Covenant, but because they deliberately and knowingly lived lives of evil, thus violating the “divine nature” God had revealed to them through creation.
​

What makes you think I didn't consider this?

It is a sobering and disturbing truth that too many of us are prone to take the position that ignorance condemns. Not necessarily, for if ignorance condemns none of us will be saved. All of us are ignorant of some truth. If God condemns eternally the honest unexposed because of ignorance, thus requiring the impossible, how could He be a merciful God? God cares. He understands. He is aware of our plight. His mercy is beyond human comprehension!​

And none of us WILL BE saved, ignorant or not, but for God's mercy.

But the whole paragraph there is bogus. It is not our ignorance that condemns us. It is our rebellion.

 

[makesends]

Makesends, if you will only reexamine Romans 1 slowly and more carefully, you will see that my remarks coincide exactly with what Paul wrote. No offence, but your twisting, turning, and distorting are not conducive to what Paul wrote--or my explanations of what he said.

​

Buff, my point is that you go beyond what is said, in several things, to what you think is implied, and claim it says those things. Even where you infer your supposed implication coming up with what is indeed true, it is only so by other scripture, and not by Romans 1. That is the problem with your hermeneutic.

I find that true in almost every instance in those who insist on self-determination in salvation. It is their whole mindset. It is how they come up with their doctrine. Their arguments always assume things such as, "It wouldn't be fair for God to make sentient creatures from whom he demands what they are unable to give.". To them, that is why a Bible reference demonstrating choice, to them demonstrates FREE choice, (which they take to mean absolutely free). But they are wrong —it is not a given.

 

[fastfredy0]

I find that true in almost every instance in those who insist on self-determination in salvation. It is their whole mindset. It is how they come up with their doctrine.

Free Will doctrine (defined as people being the cause of their faith and not God) is a WORKS doctrine. You must convince yourself to believe and for this work you are rewarded with salvation. This contradicts scripture.
Definition of WORK: a physical or mental effort to accomplish a goal

• Romans 3:28 For we conclude that a man is justified by faith apart from the works of the law.
• Romans 11:35 Who has first given to him, and it shall be recompensed unto him again?".
• 2 Timothy 1:9 for He delivered us and saved us and called us with a holy calling [a calling that leads to a consecrated life—a life set apart—a life of purpose], not because of our works [or because of any personal merit—we could do nothing to earn this], but because of His own purpose and grace [His amazing, undeserved favor] which was granted to us in Christ Jesus before the world began [eternal ages ago], [works]
• Titus 3:5 he saved us, not because of works done by us in righteousness, but according to his own mercy, by the washing of regeneration and renewal of the Holy Spirit

Galatians goes on to say that if you depend upon your works for salvation you are accursed.

 

[Buff Scott Jr.]

Buff, my point is that you go beyond what is said, in several things, to what you think is implied, and claim it says those things. Even where you infer your supposed implication coming up with what is indeed true, it is only so by other scripture, and not by Romans 1. That is the problem with your hermeneutic.

I find that true in almost every instance in those who insist on self-determination in salvation. It is their whole mindset. It is how they come up with their doctrine. Their arguments always assume things such as, "It wouldn't be fair for God to make sentient creatures from whom he demands what they are unable to give.". To them, that is why a Bible reference demonstrating choice, to them demonstrates FREE choice, (which they take to mean absolutely free). But they are wrong —it is not a given.​

Makesends, If I "go on beyond what is said" in Romans 1, as you affirm above, please select one or more items listed below and enlighten me as to which part of Paul's message collides with my analysis.

1) These Gentile pagans knew God through the revelation of creation.
2) They were free to either choose God or reject Him through the only revelation to which they had access.
3) They were free to glorify God and offer their thanksgiving.
4) They even retained the knowledge of God, but cast it aside.
5) Had they glorified God and given Him thanks, they would have become part of the elect, but since they refused Him, they remained part of the non-elect.​

 

[Mr GLee]

Do you mean no subsequent oral traditions? The Pentateuch had previously been an oral tradition...... and tradition , holds Moses was directed by God to put into writing that which had been communicated by Him, communicated among God's people, for centuries prior to Moses putting it to pen and papyrus (or leather).

Hi Thanks

In order to show God who satisfies all needs and is not served by the hands of dying mankind as a will. One third of human history had passed with no written law ,a law not subject to change as a record to the poken will of God . Men were subject to it before Christ revealed it through Moses .

Christ revealed the differnce between "oral traditons" of dying mankind. And his tradition "as it is written.: "Let there be my tradition the Bible" and "it" is written

A written law not subject to change by a oral traditons of dying mankind . I heard it through the grape vine .

Christ on Mount Sinai hewn out two stones and with his own finger he wrote on both sides with no room for the oral traditons of dying mankind. (I heard it through the legion of fathers grape vine

Coming down from Mount Sinai the people were serving the flesh represented by a idol image golden calf as oral tradition .

He had Moses destroy the first two tablets to indicate his law was broken .Then to establish a new testament covenant of grace .This time he had Moses hewn out the two tablets .Then again with his finger (will) Christ wrote the same words on both sides with no room for I heard it through the grape vine oral traditons of dying mankind.

The oral tradition of God . . ."Let there be" . . . .and . . . ."it was written"

The oral traditons of men "I heard it through the legion of fathers grapevine".

Those that did follow the laws of dying mankind oral traditons I heard it through the grape vine. In Acts 22 they murdered believers according to their Pagan foundation ."Out of sight out of mind" No invisible God .Christ calls fools .

When Paul was born again from above Christ used His apostle Paul to protect his written tradition from those who do follow "I heard it through the legion of fathers grapevine" .They tried to make all things written in the law and prophets "sola scriptura" to no effect .

Acts 24:13 Neither can they prove the things whereof they now accuse me. But this I confess unto thee, that after the way which they call heresy, so worship I the God of my fathers, believing all things which are written in the law and in the prophets:

Not worship a legion of dead fathers as God

The faithless no power to believe believe Christ walked away according to the law of the father .I heard it through the grape vine.

Christ protecting the integrity of "sola scriptura" all things written in the law and its witness the prophets

 

[fastfredy0]

Makesends, If I "go on beyond what is said" in Romans 1, as you affirm above, please select one or more items listed below and enlighten me as to which part of Paul's message collides with my analysis.

1) These Gentile pagans knew God through the revelation of creation.

Keeping in mind the contention is that these people would never heard of Christ could be saved as prescribed in Romans 1 ...
They knew of a God but their knowledge was extremely limited. In regards to salvation we find in scripture that since Christ's death the content of saving faith must include knowledge of Christ. John 3:18 John 3:36 John 5:23 John 14:5-6 Romans 10:13-15

2) They were free to either choose God or reject Him through the only revelation to which they had access.

True, there is nothing stopping them from following their desires. If you look at scripture you will see that everyone with exception has desires the cause them to NOT SEEK God. Romans 3:10-12
Again, even if they desired to seek God which contradicts scripture, they cannot find him as salvific knowledge include knowing Christ (see previous point)

3) They were free to glorify God and offer their thanksgiving.

See response to point 2

4) They even retained the knowledge of God, but cast it aside.

See point 1

5) Had they glorified God and given Him thanks, they would have become part of the elect, but since they refused Him, they remained part of the non-elect.

See point 2 ... since no one seeks God no one glorifies God. You're point is mute as the conclusions (though also faulty) are drawn upon a non functional "IF". It's like saying "If I had wings I could fly".


If your points were valid, why do 0 of billions of people who have died in the last 2000 year who never heard of Christ.... why are they all in hell. If you don't think this to be true ... state the content of these peoples salvific faith (which can't include knowledge of Christ by the definition of the conversation)

 

[Josheb]

Hi Thanks

In order to show God who satisfies all needs and is not served by the hands of dying mankind as a will. One third of human history had passed with no written law ,a law not subject to change as a record to the poken will of God . Men were subject to it before Christ revealed it through Moses .

Christ revealed the differnce between "oral traditons" of dying mankind. And his tradition "as it is written.: "Let there be my tradition the Bible" and "it" is written

A written law not subject to change by a oral traditons of dying mankind . I heard it through the grape vine .

Christ on Mount Sinai hewn out two stones and with his own finger he wrote on both sides with no room for the oral traditons of dying mankind. (I heard it through the legion of fathers grape vine

Coming down from Mount Sinai the people were serving the flesh represented by a idol image golden calf as oral tradition .

He had Moses destroy the first two tablets to indicate his law was broken .Then to establish a new testament covenant of grace .This time he had Moses hewn out the two tablets .Then again with his finger (will) Christ wrote the same words on both sides with no room for I heard it through the grape vine oral traditons of dying mankind.

The oral tradition of God . . ."Let there be" . . . .and . . . ."it was written"

The oral traditons of men "I heard it through the legion of fathers grapevine".

Those that did follow the laws of dying mankind oral traditons I heard it through the grape vine. In Acts 22 they murdered believers according to their Pagan foundation ."Out of sight out of mind" No invisible God .Christ calls fools .

When Paul was born again from above Christ used His apostle Paul to protect his written tradition from those who do follow "I heard it through the legion of fathers grapevine" .They tried to make all things written in the law and prophets "sola scriptura" to no effect .

Acts 24:13 Neither can they prove the things whereof they now accuse me. But this I confess unto thee, that after the way which they call heresy, so worship I the God of my fathers, believing all things which are written in the law and in the prophets:

Not worship a legion of dead fathers as God

The faithless no power to believe believe Christ walked away according to the law of the father .I heard it through the grape vine.

Christ protecting the integrity of "sola scriptura" all things written in the law and its witness the prophets

Thanks. I disagree, but appreicate the answers and their being posted in a timely and direct manner. Much appreciated.

 

[makesends]

Makesends, If I "go on beyond what is said" in Romans 1, as you affirm above, please select one or more items listed below and enlighten me as to which part of Paul's message collides with my analysis.

1) These Gentile pagans knew God through the revelation of creation.
2) They were free to either choose God or reject Him through the only revelation to which they had access.
3) They were free to glorify God and offer their thanksgiving.
4) They even retained the knowledge of God, but cast it aside.
5) Had they glorified God and given Him thanks, they would have become part of the elect, but since they refused Him, they remained part of the non-elect.​

See post #189 where I did exactly that.

 

[Mr GLee]

Thanks. I disagree, but appreicate the answers and their being posted in a timely and direct manner. Much appreciated.

Thanks

Then are you saying you do think they were orally passed down to Moses after the order Cathodic or Pharisees, a law of dying mankind from one generation to the next?

 

[Josheb]

Thanks

Then are you saying you do think they were orally passed down to Moses after the order Cathodic or Pharisees, a law of dying mankind from one generation to the next?

No. I am saying Paul was referring solely to the Mosaic Law in Romans 2. Citing Romans 2:12 (Post 184) and then saying the law in that verse refers to everything God ever spoke becomes problematic because the verse explicitly mentions sin apart from the law. If that "law" referred to everything God ever spoke (or had written down), then what sin could ever possibly exist apart from that? None. That rendering would also pose problems for Paul's claim all of creation, including the conscience within a person, testifies to God's existence and His power such that no one has excuse. The entire op is built on the premise there is such a thing as the "unreached," but one of the fatal flaws is that the op defines the unreached in a manner that is selective and inconsistent with the whole of scripture. Everyone has seen and heard the things that testify to the power of God but they either do not understand or they choose to use that information in atheistic or anti-theistic ways (which, in turn, testifies to their possessing some understanding because it's difficult to act in antithesis without understanding the thesis in some way).

 

[Buff Scott Jr.]

See post #189 where I did exactly that.

Try again, my brother. Your response in Post 189 doesn't even come close to my explanations. Take one item at a time and analyze it. Then we'll go from there.​