Is Sharing The Gospel Sometimes Worse Than Not Saying Anything?

[Hodos]

Nope… that’s pretty much a movement from “no knowledge of the gospel” to “knowledge of God’s promises”.

The gospel is nothing more than the good news of God’s fulfillment of his promises in Christ. That’s precisely how Peter presents it in his sermons in Acts. Also, scripture tells us the gospel was proclaimed to the dead. Thanks for playing though. The goalposts weren’t moved, you just didn’t understand the nature of the gospel. Lastly, I never claimed mere knowledge of either God’s promises or the gospel results in salvation. You left out the parts where I said they believed and trusted in them. We are saved by faith through grace.

 

[Gorgias]

The gospel is nothing more than the good news of God’s fulfillment of his promises in Christ.

Fair enough. Yet, the people in the OT about whom you’re speaking didn’t know what these promises were (other than ‘messiah’ – and certainly not ‘Son of God’ or ‘salvation by faith’). They hadn’t heard the gospel. Therefore, they don’t meet your criteria.

You see where I’m going, right? You’ve painted yourself into a corner here: either you have to say that the OT patriarchs are condemned to hell, or that you can be saved without knowledge of Jesus. Which is it?

Also, scripture tells us the gospel was proclaimed to the dead.

Nice try. There’s no post-death opportunity to accept Christ. The Church (and Protestant reformers) have taught that without exception. So, you can’t claim “they heard about Jesus from the Bosom of Abraham” without denying Scriptural teaching.

 

[Hodos]

You see where I’m going, right? You’ve painted yourself into a corner here: either you have to say that the OT patriarchs are condemned to hell, or that you can be saved without knowledge of Jesus. Which is it?

No, I reject your either/or statement. God gave them promises of blessings, and salvation through the seed of Abraham. They believed that God was faithful to fulfill it. God fulfilled it and declared to them its fulfillment. Again, here, your assumptions in the either/or statement above seem to preclude the Trinity, the fact that Christ IS part of the godhead who issued the promises to begin with. Coincidentally, we have been given promises to look forward to of Christ’s return, the redemption of all creation, the resurrection to come, and the destruction of sin, death, and the devil which are not yet fulfilled, and yet we believe, teach, and confess, that Christ is faithful to fulfill them. Is your contention that because these promises are yet to be fulfilled the gospel has no power to save?

Nice try. There’s no post-death opportunity to accept Christ. The Church (and Protestant reformers) have taught that without exception. So, you can’t claim “they heard about Jesus from the Bosom of Abraham” without denying Scriptural teaching.

No one said they did. They believed in the promises of God, as stated before, Christ it seems declares to them their fulfillment in himself. And the teaching of Christ descending to the dead is not a denial of Scriptural teaching.