(January 7, 2015 at 11:42 am)RobbyPants Wrote:(December 27, 2014 at 4:08 pm)Glitch Wrote:
This line of reasoning is always so weird to me. I understand the notion that they don't want their god to looks like a monster, but this apologetic has some very bizarre consequences.
Her stated position is that people who did not know about God have a 0% chance of going to hell, and people that do know about God now have a choice to accept or reject him. This means that people who know about God have a non-zero chance of going to hell. So, by evangelizing to people, you are increasing their chance of going to hell.
The highest moral good is to stop telling people about God. The more standard apologetic I hear on this topic is that the Holy Spirit comes to everyone in some undeniable way, and it is up to them to accept or reject God. How you can reject something that is "undeniable" is beyond me, but that's beside the point. You can look at a map and have a pretty good idea what religion a person is by knowing where they're from. So, even if this is all true, the Holy Spirit is demonstrably less effective than regional demographics and religious upbringing. So, people teaching people is way more effective than the "undeniable" influence of the Holy Spirit. Oops.
You've got it wrong. I'm not saying that everyone who has never heard of Christ will be saved because of their ignorance. According to Romans Chapter 1, because of the evidence in nature, no one has an excuse not to believe in God. Therefore, we all should be believers in God. There are people who have never heard of Christ, but have honestly believed in God and have searched for the truth about him. These people, I believe, would have salvation. There are other people who have not heard of Christ, but refuse to seek out God. These would not receive salvation.
