Martin Luther added the word "alone"?

[TriuneUnity]

continued from previous…

When one proclaims Christ’s finished work and world justification this must always be done with the purpose that it be received through faith (Mark 16:16; Rom 1:16-17). When one speaks of faith or justification through faith this must be done in such a way
that it is clear that faith is logically subsequent not prior to the Gospel of objective justification. (Rom 3:21-28; 5:1-11; 2 Cor 5:19 20; Gal. 4:4- 7; Col. 1:20-23) It is contrary to Scripture and the pure Gospel to teach: That there is any more basic goal in Gospel proclamation than the Holy Spirit’s creation of faith in the hearers; That the psychological dimension of justifying faith is more basic and important than justifying faith as receptivity.

It must be proclaimed in the churches and in the world that man is a sinner (law) just as it must be proclaimed that man is forgiven and righteous for Christ’s sake that God forgives sins because of Christ’s fulfillment of the just demands of the law (Gospel). (Matt 19:16-22; Rom. 3:9-19, 25-26; 10:4; Gal. 3:10-14, 21-26) It is contrary to Scripture and the pure Gospel to teach: That people at any time in history do not need the law to expose their sin.

It must be proclaimed in the church and to the world that God is reconciled and at peace with all (Gospel) just as that God is angry and punishes sinners (law) must be proclaimed in the church and to the world. (Ps. 5:5; 90:7-8; 103:10-12; Is. 52:3-7; Luke 24:47; Rom. 1:18; 2:5; 4:13-15; 2 Cor. 3:9; 5:19-20; Eph. 2:3; 5:6; Col. 3:6; 1 John 2:1-2) It is contrary to Scripture and the pure Gospel to teach: That people can have saving faith in God even though they have not heard the definite Word which tells them that God for Christ’s sake is no longer angry with them.

With the command to preach the Gospel to every creature Christ has commanded that the forgiveness of sins which He has acquired for all that is complete absolution be preached to all. But the distinction between law and Gospel must always be observed lest the penitent be further afflicted with the law or the impenitent be falsely comforted with the Gospel. (Mark 16:15; Luke 24:47) This absolution or forgiveness of sins based upon Christ’s perfect and vicarious obedience of life death and resurrection is the Gospel whether proclaimed to many or few. (Matt. 9:1-8; Luke 24:47)

Private absolution is nothing else than the proclamation of the Gospel to the individual sinner. (John 20:23) It is contrary to Scripture and the pure Gospel to teach: That private absolution has, is based on, or confers some power outside the Gospel, e.g., a power inherent in the person or office of the person pronouncing the absolution.

The proclamation of forgiveness, or absolution (Gods justification, or acquittal), does not consist in the fact that the confessor, or pastor, sits as judge over the confessant and renders a verdict over his worthiness or faith, nor is it an empty announcement, or
mere wish, that the confessant be forgiven, but it powerfully imparts forgiveness and salvation. (Matt. 7:1-5; 9:1-5; John 5:39; Acts 11:14; Rom. 1:16-17; 10:17; 1 Cor 1:21; 4:3-5; James 4:11; 1 Peter 1:23) It is contrary to Scripture and the pure Gospel to teach: That the word of absolution may be pronounced conditionally, e.g., I forgive you your sins, on the condition that you believe and change your life; That absolution is not a true forgiveness, a divine verdict by which God exonerates and forgives sins, but merely an offer of forgiveness to those who believe; That since we cannot be certain of the true contrition and faith of anyone, we cannot pronounce an unconditional absolution.

The efficacy of the proclamation of forgiveness, or absolution, does not depend upon man’s worthiness, confession, or faith; rather absolution solicits faith and, like Baptism, creates and sustains the very faith that it solicits. (John 17:20; Acts 11:20-21; Rom. 1:16; 10:17; 1 Cor. 1:21-24) It is contrary to Scripture and the pure Gospel to teach: That anyone receives for himself the forgiveness granted in absolution without faith; That the proper object of faith, that to which it clings, is the inner assurance, the
indwelling Christ, or some other inner experience or feeling of forgiveness, instead of the external means of grace; That the hearing of the Gospel and the use of the sacraments is merely the
evidence that true faith exists in the heart, rather than that the hearing of the Gospel and the use of the sacraments are the means by which God awakens and confirms faith in those who use them.

Although the term justification may be used interchangeably with regeneration (the bestowal of faith), since faith given in regeneration is the faith through which the sinner is justified (Gal. 3:26-27; Titus 3:3-7), the term must never be confused or used interchangeably with renewal (sanctification, love, the keeping of the law), which always follows faith. (Acts 13:38-39; Rom. 3:28; 11:6; Gal. 2:16; Eph. 2:8-10) It is contrary to Scripture and the pure Gospel to teach: That we are justified, or forgiven, by virtue of our mystical union with Christ, rather than by God’s verdict or pronouncement of forgiveness in the means of grace; That since faith involves our union with Christ, this union with Christ becomes the basis for our justification before God.

Faith, which is worked by the Holy Spirit in the sinner solely through the Gospel, must not be confused with contrition, that is, terror of conscience and fear of God’s wrath, which is worked by the Holy Spirit in the sinner solely through the law. (Ps. 32:3-5; 130:1-8; Rom. 3:19-28; Gal. 3:12) It is contrary to Scripture and the pure Gospel to teach: That true faith can exist in the heart without contrition.

Good works and renewal are the result of faith, or the fruit of faith, in the sense that the Holy Spirit, who has quickened us and made us new creatures in Christ, works the fruits of faith in and through us. (Ps. 110:3; Jer. 31:31-34; John 15:1-11; Rom 12:1; 2 Cor. 5:17; 8:3-4; Gal 5:22-24) It is contrary to Scripture and the pure Gospel to teach: That good works in the Christian life are to be motivated by the law; That good works are not a necessary result of an individual’s justification.

Faith, which alone receives and obtains grace and forgiveness, must not be confused with good works, which are pleasing to God only because of faith in Christ. (John 15:1-11; Acts 13:38-39; Rom. 3:28; 11:6; 14:23; Gal. 2:16; Eph. 2:8-10) It is contrary to Scripture and the pure Gospel to teach: That man is saved by faith and works; That good works are pleasing to God for their own sake or because they justify; That it is possible for a person to desire to grow spiritually without having already been justified through faith; That challenging Christians to do good works can cause faith to grow.

Every justified and regenerated sinner can and should be certain of his salvation. (John 10:28; Rom. 8:37-39; Phil. 1:6; 2 Tim 1:12; 1 Peter 1:3-5; 5:10; 1 John 3:2; 5:10-13) The justified sinners certainty of salvation should not be sought in his experience
good works feelings or faith but rest only in the once and for all obedience of Christ’s life and death and resurrection. (1 John 5:9 -10; Rom. 8:32-34; 10:6 -8; 1 Cor. 1:29-30; 4:1-5; Gal. 6:14-15) It is contrary to Scripture and the pure Gospel to teach: That no one can be certain of forgiveness or justification before God unless he also perceives in his life the spiritual gifts imparted by the Holy Spirit; That Christians can only be assured of their justification before God when they are able to identify the evidence of and the presence of good works in their own life.

The justified sinners certainty of salvation is mediated only by the Gospel to which alone he clings for certainty. (2 Cor. 1:19-20; 1 John 5:9-10) It is contrary to Scripture and the pure Gospel to teach: That we are not to rely solely upon Christ and the Gospel promise in the means of grace for the certainty of our salvation but that we must also be able to see in our own life the evidence of spiritual gifts in order to be certain that we have been justified before God.

 

[1stChristian]

You can cut and paste all you want with looooong posts about this.
Fact is, Luther was wrong, he divorced himself from the one true church, he added words in the Sacred text, he threw out 7 books from God’s holy bible. Can’t change history. I suggest you read his Biography from his own words.

 

[MDK]

Also, if Luther no longer needed confession as a result of this understanding, why did he include it in his sacraments?

It’s a good question, and even though simply stated, the answer is not as simple.

Their “sacraments” don’t match up with our Sacraments. Our Sacrament of Reconciliation is an integral part of our salvation journey especially in being forgiven for mortal sin. It allows us also to be reconciled to Christ from our sin that separated us, and allows us to be in proper disposition when receiving Jesus in the Holy Eucharist. If one believes they are saved by faith alone, then the idea of “confession” (or absolution) becomes very watered down when compared to the way we understand. It is not something really essential, but more like a nice thing to do. For Lutherans, it makes no difference in regard to salvation, if they did sin mortally all the time, as long as they have greater faith! I believe Luther said “Be a sinner, and sin boldly; but believe more boldly still”. We know this to be a false teaching, misleading many who may actually desire to have a real relationship with and be close to Christ.

Even worse, it does not even matter what Lutherans teach about their version of confession (absolution), because their “priests” have no tie to Apostolic Succession. To illustrate this for the purpose of discussing something like their “confession,” even if they said they believed the exact same thing in regard to our Sacraments, you cannot compare their holy orders, confession (absolution), nor eucharist (I would capitalize if it were the real Eucharist). The harsh reality is that Lutheran “priesthood” is invalid. It would be pretty much the same as you giving absolution to TriuneUnity for sins like heresy. To further make the point, have you ever heard of a Lutheran eucharistic miracle? I haven’t, and we won’t. Even if they referred to Transubstantiation (which they don’t), their “priests” are not valid and cannot consecrate. In the same way, how can they share in the Apostolic role of forgiveness of sin, with authority that Jesus gave to His Apostles? It was the power to bestow forgiveness in the name of God and the right to decide whether it was to be given or refused. This power belongs only to the apostolic ministry.

To further bring home the point regarding their “sacrament of absolution” or any other of their sacraments… No Catholic Bishops went with Luther when he left the Church, and so one cannot argue that there was some succession to the priesthood. A priest cannot ordain another priest. Luther’s attempts at ordination are invalid. It takes a Bishop to make a priest. The line of Priests is valid in God’s Church, the Church built by Christ. There have been numerous documented cases of Eucharistic miracles in the Catholic Church. Having the true and real Body, Blood, Soul and Divinity of Christ available to us is like a miracle to me!

It can be interesting to talk about what they believe in regard to their “sacraments,” and perhaps helpful to understand where an individual is. However, without a valid priesthood, what do their “sacraments” really do? The only thing that will matter for them, is that they can use the faith in one God, and any tidbit of truth they currently possess to come to the fullness of truth in God’s Church… the one they’d still be in if it weren’t for the excommunicated heretic Martin Luther, or someone like him.

 

[moondweller]

It can be interesting to talk about what they believe in regard to their “sacraments,” and perhaps helpful to understand where an individual is. However, without a valid priesthood, what do their “sacraments” really do?

Or, it could be asked, with all of your sacraments, your priesthood, and the sacrifice of your Eucharist, what did Christ do?

 

[MDK]

Or, it could be asked, with all of your sacraments, your priesthood, and the sacrifice of your Eucharist, what did Christ do?

We already know what Christ did, in freeing us from slavery to sin, in His once for all time (never ending) sacrifice. Since Christ is the head of the Catholic Church, why not just ask Him directly, since you refuse to honestly look at the truth of the Church, as we have told you.

Martin Luther refused to look at and adopt the truth, and so excommunicated himself by his refusal to recant heresies, from the only Church which Christ made. Sadly, you follow in his footsteps some 500 years later in unwillingness to go with the truth, or even give it an honest look for that matter.

Unless one is willing to consider the truth, and seeks it, what good is conversation with you about truth. I spoke God’s truth to a cat, who like you wasn’t willing to listen, but unlike you, didn’t object.

What are you doing to show you are made in the image and likeness of God? I would say that listening to his Holy Word in an unadulterated manner would be a good place to start. Unlike the cat, you have an opportunity to be close to our Creator, and know Him. One way we become close and know Him is through the Sacraments, and living on every word that comes from the Mouth of God…, without distorting it for personal misuse.

 

[ralphinal]

Or, it could be asked, with all of your sacraments, your priesthood, and the sacrifice of your Eucharist, what did Christ do?

By disconnecting Christ from the sacraments, you have made the error of throwing out everything Christ did. The sacraments do not in any way replace Jesus, they are Jesus and his mercy fulfilled.

Baptism was ordered by Jesus. With it, we are connected to the Crucifixion and adopted Children of God.

Confession was ordered by Jesus. Through it, we acknowlege the sins that we have committed and are forgive them. We can resume a right state towards God and receive his Grace.

Communion allows us to be at the Last Supper and Calvery. We are able to “eat his flesh and drink his blood” as Jesus told us to.

I can go on.

If a farmer planted a tree and did nothing to help it along, it would grow slowly. The sacraments plant the tree, prune it, fertilize it, treat it for pests, and more.

 

[ralphinal]

TU,
Talking to Lutherans can be like talking to catholics or EO. You have a fleshed out theology and it is easy to access.

I understand everything that you posted in that long set of posts. Yes, it is helpful. What I am still hung up on is when Jesus said you do not ever have to do anything but beleive. I am not quite talking Calvinistic it doesn’t matter, but you must admit that Jesus paints a picture of action that begins with faith.

 

[TriuneUnity]

TU,
Talking to Lutherans can be like talking to catholics or EO. You have a fleshed out theology and it is easy to access.

I understand everything that you posted in that long set of posts. Yes, it is helpful. What I am still hung up on is when Jesus said you do not ever have to do anything but beleive. I am not quite talking Calvinistic it doesn’t matter, but you must admit that Jesus paints a picture of action that begins with faith.

I apologize if that was long, but I thought it necessary given that you and I were kind of getting hung up on a few points and maybe starting to talk past each other. I think most importantly, the following is pertinent. It is contrary to Scripture and the pure Gospel to teach: That a sinner contributes to his justification by his own powers merits or works; That love or good works precede or cause justification rather than follow from it as its fruit; That people may comfort themselves with forgiveness and the Gospel and imagine that they have justifying faith when in fact they continue to live impenitently in mortal sin and have no intention to amend their lives.

 

[ralphinal]

I apologize if that was long, but I thought it necessary given that you and I were kind of getting hung up on a few points and maybe starting to talk past each other. I think most importantly, the following is pertinent. It is contrary to Scripture and the pure Gospel to teach: That a sinner contributes to his justification by his own powers merits or works; That love or good works precede or cause justification rather than follow from it as its fruit; That people may comfort themselves with forgiveness and the Gospel and imagine that they have justifying faith when in fact they continue to live impenitently in mortal sin and have no intention to amend their lives.

That quote does not phase me. I am not talking about working into justification. I am saying that Jesus makes it clear, at least to me, that if you are a follower of his, you will be known by your fruits. It seems like the only fruit of faith alone is a bunch of do-nothings who think that the poor can pull themselves up by their bootstraps when they have neither boots nor straps.

Not to derail even more, but did Luther retain an understanding of mortal and venial sin? If so, and I have seen other quotes to say he did, where did that go?

 

[TriuneUnity]

That quote does not phase me. I am not talking about working into justification. I am saying that Jesus makes it clear, at least to me, that if you are a follower of his, you will be known by your fruits. It seems like the only fruit of faith alone is a bunch of do-nothings who think that the poor can pull themselves up by their bootstraps when they have neither boots nor straps.

Not to derail even more, but did Luther retain an understanding of mortal and venial sin? If so, and I have seen other quotes to say he did, where did that go?

I think what you’re referring to is a product of Americanism. If anything, pick yourself up by your own bootstraps mentalities are far more common among those who hold to a works-righteousness position. This is especially true of Mormonism and Islam. If you’re honest opinion of those who hold to sola fide is one of fruitlessness, then I suggest you take a serious look at those missionaries, aid groups, etc. that Protestants have belonged to. We are to follow the commands of Christ. There is no disputing that. Since this thread at the beginning mainly addressed the topic of justification that is what my comments have been geared toward.

If you want to move to the “Christian life,” then yes, it consists of nothing but works as far as how our lives are to be conducted and lived before the world.

Lutherans do retain and adhere to the concept of mortal and venial sin. It is different than what Rome adheres to in several points.

 

[ralphinal]

I think what you’re referring to is a product of Americanism. If anything, pick yourself up by your own bootstraps mentalities are far more common among those who hold to a works-righteousness position. This is especially true of Mormonism and Islam. If you’re honest opinion of those who hold to sola fide is one of fruitlessness, then I suggest you take a serious look at those missionaries, aid groups, etc. that Protestants have belonged to. We are to follow the commands of Christ. There is no disputing that. Since this thread at the beginning mainly addressed the topic of justification that is what my comments have been geared toward.

If you want to move to the “Christian life,” then yes, it consists of nothing but works as far as how our lives are to be conducted and lived before the world.

Lutherans do retain and adhere to the concept of mortal and venial sin. It is different than what Rome adheres to in several points.

After I posted this, I thought about it, and yes it is a primarily American issue. However, i say that those who hold to a works-rightousness alone position do far more than a faith alone position to help their fellow men. The Catholic Church is truly in the middle, yet we do far more than everyone else combined.

You know, you are right. I am speaking of “Christian life.” However, I do not think that any of the first Christians, or Christ himself, would have seen a separation of theology and lifestyle. That seems clear in the Bible.

I would love to discuss the sin issue, but we doa good enough job hijacking threads. Somehow, we stay polite. Send me some info on how the Lutheran view is different. My first wife was Lutheran, and she swore that ya’ll did not see mortal and venial.

 

[TriuneUnity]

After I posted this, I thought about it, and yes it is a primarily American issue. However, i say that those who hold to a works-rightousness alone position do far more than a faith alone position to help their fellow men. The Catholic Church is truly in the middle, yet we do far more than everyone else combined.

There’s no doubting that when it comes to good works, Catholics are in a realm all by themselves. The most ardently Christ-like in every Lutheran congregation I’ve been in were former Catholics. I would dispute, though, that works-alone religions are more fruitful. Remember that in an ultimate sense, those who are works-conscious but unconverted are actually producing bad fruit from God’s perspective, even if it is outwardly good to our perception.

You know, you are right. I am speaking of “Christian life.” However, I do not think that any of the first Christians, or Christ himself, would have seen a separation of theology and lifestyle. That seems clear in the Bible.

I would agree. I would argue, though, that ultimately from a theological perspective, it only once we’ve been liberated from the threats and punishments of the Law, and are motivated solely out of selfless service in thanks to our God, can we truly do that which is righteous. If we are trying to justify ourselves by our actions, then our works are self-righteous. If we are working to avoid punishment, our actions are motivated out of self-preservation.

I would love to discuss the sin issue, but we doa good enough job hijacking threads. Somehow, we stay polite. Send me some info on how the Lutheran view is different. My first wife was Lutheran, and she swore that ya’ll did not see mortal and venial.

I will get the references out of our confessional statements for ya.

 

[ralphinal]

There’s no doubting that when it comes to good works, Catholics are in a realm all by themselves. The most ardently Christ-like in every Lutheran congregation I’ve been in were former Catholics. I would dispute, though, that works-alone religions are more fruitful. Remember that in an ultimate sense, those who are works-conscious but unconverted are actually producing bad fruit from God’s perspective, even if it is outwardly good to our perception.

True. And some of the works only guys are more likely to go way past what we would consider as sin.

I would agree. I would argue, though, that ultimately from a theological perspective, it only once we’ve been liberated from the threats and punishments of the Law, and are motivated solely out of selfless service in thanks to our God, can we truly do that which is righteous. If we are trying to justify ourselves by our actions, then our works are self-righteous. If we are working to avoid punishment, our actions are motivated out of self-preservation.

Ok

I will get the references out of our confessional statements for ya.

TY. Which Synod are you again?

 

[TriuneUnity]

TY. Which Synod are you again?

I was previously LCMS. However, I am in the process of joining a congregation that belongs to the WELS.

The following is from the LCMS website on mortal and venial sins; the WELS would agree with this position.

Mortal sins are those sins that result in the eternal death of the sinner. This term mortal sins includes all sins of unbelievers, since without faith, they are without hope of eternal salvation.

In the case of believers, those sins are called mortal that force the Holy Spirit to depart from one’s heart and life–sins that destroy faith. Venial sins are sins which, though they in themselves merit eternal death, are daily forgiven to the believer. Venial sins are perhaps better called “sins of weakness.” They do not drive away the Holy Spirit, and do not extinguish faith.

We have a perfect example in the Bible of an individual who, as a believer, committed mortal sin: King David. When he took Uriah’s wife and committed adultery with her, and then schemed to have Uriah killed, he was actually in a state where he had fallen from faith and had driven out the Holy Spirit. These were no mere sins of weakness on his part, but sins knowingly committed, with great forethought and planning. The only solution to this grave situation was the preaching of God’s Law, which worked mightily in his life to move him to repentance and restoration to faith and God’s saving grace.

In unbelievers, all sin is without any distinction; they are always dominant, even though individual sins may not turn into actual actions. All unbelievers are dead in trespasses and sin, and Satan is the ruling power in them (Eph. 2:1-3; Col . 1:13; Acts 26:18).

The state of grace in which sin no longer rules over us is found only in believers (Romans 6:14). When in the lives of believers the struggle of the spirit against the flesh has ceased and the sins have again become dominant, then these believers have fallen from faith. Hence the admonition, “Let not sin therefore reign in your mortal body” (Rom. 6:12).

It is usually the case that faithful Christians are the ones most troubled by their sin, as well it should be, but they begin to wonder, “Have I fallen so far that God’s grace can not reach me?” In that case, of course, the answer is, “No.”

And it is also the case that those caught up in a sinful lifestyle that is driving them further and further away from the kingdom may not recognize their sin. To those people, God’s word of Law must be clearly proclaimed so that, like David, they are turned from their sin and back to the mercy of God, given us through our Lord Jesus Christ, whose blood cleanses us from all sin.

 

[ralphinal]

I was previously LCMS. However, I am in the process of joining a congregation that belongs to the WELS.

The following is from the LCMS website on mortal and venial sins; the WELS would agree with this position.

Mortal sins are those sins that result in the eternal death of the sinner. This term mortal sins includes all sins of unbelievers, since without faith, they are without hope of eternal salvation.

In the case of believers, those sins are called mortal that force the Holy Spirit to depart from one’s heart and life–sins that destroy faith. Venial sins are sins which, though they in themselves merit eternal death, are daily forgiven to the believer. Venial sins are perhaps better called “sins of weakness.” They do not drive away the Holy Spirit, and do not extinguish faith.

We have a perfect example in the Bible of an individual who, as a believer, committed mortal sin: King David. When he took Uriah’s wife and committed adultery with her, and then schemed to have Uriah killed, he was actually in a state where he had fallen from faith and had driven out the Holy Spirit. These were no mere sins of weakness on his part, but sins knowingly committed, with great forethought and planning. The only solution to this grave situation was the preaching of God’s Law, which worked mightily in his life to move him to repentance and restoration to faith and God’s saving grace.

In unbelievers, all sin is without any distinction; they are always dominant, even though individual sins may not turn into actual actions. All unbelievers are dead in trespasses and sin, and Satan is the ruling power in them (Eph. 2:1-3; Col . 1:13; Acts 26:18).

The state of grace in which sin no longer rules over us is found only in believers (Romans 6:14). When in the lives of believers the struggle of the spirit against the flesh has ceased and the sins have again become dominant, then these believers have fallen from faith. Hence the admonition, “Let not sin therefore reign in your mortal body” (Rom. 6:12).

It is usually the case that faithful Christians are the ones most troubled by their sin, as well it should be, but they begin to wonder, “Have I fallen so far that God’s grace can not reach me?” In that case, of course, the answer is, “No.”

And it is also the case that those caught up in a sinful lifestyle that is driving them further and further away from the kingdom may not recognize their sin. To those people, God’s word of Law must be clearly proclaimed so that, like David, they are turned from their sin and back to the mercy of God, given us through our Lord Jesus Christ, whose blood cleanses us from all sin.

Fair enough. I wonder why more Lutherans do not know of the distinction. Or why other Protestant groups do not see one.

Also, from this artivle only, I would say that Lutheran position is that 100% of all non-beleivers are damned. Is that correct?

 

[TriuneUnity]

Fair enough. I wonder why more Lutherans do not know of the distinction. Or why other Protestant groups do not see one.

It would depend on what Lutheran church body they belonged to, mostly. If they were ELCA or another liberal body, it probably wouldn’t be addressed as often, if it all.

Also, from this artivle only, I would say that Lutheran position is that 100% of all non-beleivers are damned. Is that correct?

From what we know of what God’s Word says, yes. Apart from Christ, all will be eternally lost.

 

[ralphinal]

It would depend on what Lutheran church body they belonged to, mostly. If they were ELCA or another liberal body, it probably wouldn’t be addressed as often, if it all.

From what we know of what God’s Word says, yes. Apart from Christ, all will be eternally lost.

So the Merciful God who wills that all mankind be saved would allow people to be born who through no fault of their own could never hear of Jesus and therefore be forced to hell? All native Americans before Columbus? Everyone living outside of Isreal in 30A.D.? Seems a little harsh…

 

[TriuneUnity]

So the Merciful God who wills that all mankind be saved would allow people to be born who through no fault of their own could never hear of Jesus and therefore be forced to hell? All native Americans before Columbus? Everyone living outside of Isreal in 30A.D.? Seems a little harsh…

It is harsh only when viewed through the lens of human bias toward our own state outside of Christ. When viewed from the eye of the all-perfect and Holy God, it is another thing entirely. God forces no man to Hell; God judges all mankind by His standard (the Law). It is equitable, fair, and entirely unbiased. Because of mankind’s self-determined rebellion God has judged that for the sins they committed, they must be sent to eternal perdition. There is no need for a defense of God’s actions here, or a theodicy.

God desires all men to be saved through the Gospel. He doesn’t, however, owe it to any man. Man deserves nothing but punishment for his cosmic crimes against the Lord. It is a testament to God’s loving kindness that He would provide any means of salvation at all.

 

[ralphinal]

It is harsh only when viewed through the lens of human bias toward our own state outside of Christ. When viewed from the eye of the all-perfect and Holy God, it is another thing entirely. God forces no man to Hell; God judges all mankind by His standard (the Law). It is equitable, fair, and entirely unbiased. Because of mankind’s self-determined rebellion God has judged that for the sins they committed, they must be sent to eternal perdition. There is no need for a defense of God’s actions here, or a theodicy.

God desires all men to be saved through the Gospel. He doesn’t, however, owe it to any man. Man deserves nothing but punishment for his cosmic crimes against the Lord. It is a testament to God’s loving kindness that He would provide any means of salvation at all.

Wait, can someone who had absolutely no way to know about Jesus get to heaven?

If yes, then it is only through God’s mercy and Jesus’s death. God may judge them based on how they would have responded to the grace had they known.

If know, then it cannot be said that God wills the salvation of all men.

 

[TriuneUnity]

Wait, can someone who had absolutely no way to know about Jesus get to heaven?

If yes, then it is only through God’s mercy and Jesus’s death. God may judge them based on how they would have responded to the grace had they known.

If know, then it cannot be said that God wills the salvation of all men.

The person who has no way to know about Christ can only get to heaven if they are able to keep the Law perfectly on their own. Since the answer to that is no, then they would not be able to. God does not will the salvation of all men in the sense that He makes it happen; He desires it to happen. There is a vast difference between those two terms. A judge in a courtroom may desire to find someone not guilty for their crimes, but he must act according to his just nature as judge. That is amplified to the tenth power when it comes to God, who, unlike a human judge, is perfectly just.

He uses the means of the Church to bring the lost into His kingdom and only the means of grace offered by the Church. This is why the Church’s mission is urgent before the Second Advent; it is a divine rescue mission to the lost.

There is nothing in Scripture that states in any way, shape, or form, that salvation is possible outside of faith in Christ.