Category Archives: God

Standard

Posted by

Posted on

May 20, 2016

Posted under

God, Salvation

How does God show goodness to those who never hear the gospel?

Recent articles have dealth with justice and goodness of God in sending people to hell. Though one can understand the necessity of hell and even admit eternal punishment in hell is good act by a good God. A small nagging thought remains that God is not really good to those who are condemned to hell. If God is really good and if Jesus’ death on the cross is sufficient to forgive every sin of every person why wouldn’t God make sure that every one believed the gospel? Yet God is good. He shows His goodness to all men. None are condemned to hell because of a lack in the goodness of God but because the wickedness of men moves them to reject God’s obvious goodness. How is God good to all men, even those who never hear the gospel?

God is good in giving and sustaining life. None come into this world only because of biological processes. God’s goodness is the ultimate source of life men and His goodness sustains their life. “For in Him we live and move and have our being.” (Acts 17:28) More than the granting of life to men God’s goodness is daily evident by His delaying judgment on individuals and the whole world. “It is of the LORD’S mercies that we are not consumed, because his compassions fail not.” (Lamentations 3:22)

God is good in giving the blessings of daily provision to all men. In His goodness God sends rain and sun on the just and the unjust alike. “He maketh His sun to rise on the evil and the good, and sendeth rain on the just and the unjust.”(Matthew 5:34) God could send only fair weather on the just and send torment only to the unsaved. He could mark out the unsaved to be victims of horrible plagues like He did the Egytpians. In His gracious goodness God does not do these things. He gives to men what is necessary for life and what is good for happiness. “He causeth the grass to grow fro the cattle, and herb for the service of man: that he may bring forth food out of the earth; and wine that maketh glad the heart of man, and oil to make his face to shine , and bread which strengtheneth man’s heart.” In their sin men turn the good gifts of God into replacements for God yet God is still good and continues to He makes testimony of Him clear through nature.

God is good in giving a daily declaration of His greatness. Every day every one sees and hears testimony of God. Through the rising of the sun, the passing of the seasons, the growing of flowers, the running of streams and the granting of food God declares Himself to be God. All creation is a reminder that men are contigent creatures. Every person is dependent on something outside himself to sustain his existence. Every person is dependent on things beyond his control for his continued life. God gives those things that man needs to live. The continued operation of the universe in its accustomed fashion is testimony to the majesty of God. In His goodness He has given mankind this constant reminder of Him.

In His goodness to the world God has sent out His servants to preach the gospel. God could have chosen to limit the gospel message to only one family of people. He could have locked the gospel behind closed doors restricted only to the select few. He did none of these things. Since the very beginning God has made salvation known to the whole world. Today God is making the gospel known to the world through Christians going taking the gospel across the globe. Even this blog and it’s accompanying radio broadcast is an evidence of the goodness of God. Christians are using a myriad of means to proclaim the gospel in every corner of world. This ever expanding missionary effort is the direct result of the goodness of God. God has sent out His children as ambassadors to tell every person on earth of the saving grace of God. He knows most will reject, some will scorn and some will assault the messengers of salvation, but God continues to show His goodness to the world by sending His children out as “sheep in the midst of wolves” (Matthew 10:16).

The greatest evidence of the goodness of God is His promise to all men. God promises any who seek Him will find Him. God does not hide Himself from those who wish to know the truth. Those who are thirsty are invited to come and to those who desire the water of life it will be freely given.

Read Psalm 104 for further reflection on this theme.

Standard

Posted by

Posted on

May 13, 2016

Posted under

Death, God, Hell

How is an eternal hell just?

Some view eternal suffering in the lake of fire to be as reasonable as shooting a puppy for wetting the carpet. A good, loving God would never be party to such an extreme injustice. Yet Christian teaching declares that eternal hell is just, good and necessary. How can eternal punishment in torments of flames and darkness be justice?

Justice is the legal response to wrong that brings punishment in proportion with the severity of the crime committed. Contrary to justice is revenge. Revenge is the personal, illegal act of making another endure the same pain that the injured person feels. Justice is not motivated by a desire to get even but by a recognition of the true damage done by a crime. The Old Testament law of “an eye for an eye” was not a prescription for personal revenge but a description of legitimate justice which responded to wrong based upon the extent of harm done. Similar principles of justice are still seen in courts today. The accidental causing of another’s death is treated differently from negligently contributing to the death of a person which is treated differently from suddenly striking down a person which is treated differently from planning and executing the murder of another. Premeditated murder of an adult is treated differently from the intentional murder of an infant. The intent of the crime and the innocence of the victim legitimately affect the response to that crime. Along with murder treason usually brings the severest of punishments. Though treason does not always take another’s life, such a harsh response is generally recognized as just because treason offends the dignity of the ruling power and it threatens the safety of many others within the country. Treason is a repudiation of one’s former allegiances that seeks the harm of ones own country, including friends and neighbors, and thus merits stern penalties.

What does treason have to do with the justice of hell? To understand the justice of hell one must understand the true horribleness of sin. Sin is no mere accident. Sin is first and foremost a willful act of rebellion against the God of heaven. God is Creator of all things and sole Ruler over all creation. Sin is therefore an act of treason far greater than any national treachery. Sin is mutiny against the perfect Creator. Sin is a repudiation of God, self and fellow man. Disobedience against God is an act of treason that wrongs God, injures self and wounds others. Disobedience against God is worse than mere treason. Disobedience against God is the attempt to overthrow God as ruler of your life and to inaugurate your own self as lord of your own destiny. This treachery is not only treason it is attempt to seize power from the Divine.

Since sin is the rejection of God as God and rebellion against His rule sin causes uncalculable harm to the individual and others around. Sin has wreaked havoc across the world. Sin is responsible for the death of billions and for the anguish felt in every part of creation. Every person born on the planet is complicit with sin. How can such evil against one’s Creator, Sovereign and God not require the greatest of punishments? Because sin is the rebellion of creature against the infinite, eternal Creator the scope of sin is limitless. A just response is measured to be appropriate to the scope of crime committed. A limitless crime requires a limitless payment. No finite creature is able to satisfy justice through any punishment of limited duration. The only appropriate judgment for a crime of infinite severity is an infinite punishment. Hell is just.

Standard

Posted by

Posted on

April 29, 2016

Posted under

God, Salvation

How could a good God send to hell people who have never heard the gospel?

Eternal punishment of humans in a place of fire, darkness and extreme torment may be accepted as a necessity of justice but can it really be a good thing? More importantly, can one be good who would condemn a person to unending torture? This issue has been offered by some skeptics as conclusive proof the God of the Bible is not real. This issue has resulted in Christians suggesting varieties of universal salvation (Recently seen in the book, “Love Wins”), views of mitigated judgment that results in a near universal salvation (purgatory), and pithy statements declaring it’s really men who choose to go to hell (“God doesn’t send anyone to hell, people choose to go there”). Variants of these themes abound attempting to show that God is not the bad guy.

Understanding this difficult question begins with the reality of justice. Justice is not a social construct that institutionalizes or rationalizes revenge. Justice is the proper moral response to evil. Justice measures the moral weight of the wrong done and responds with an equally weighty consequence. Justice is based on an absolute standard of morality- God’s character. God’s justice is always a reflection of God’s character. If God’s justice is capricious, excessive or petty then God Himself is capricious, excessive or petty.

Since all justice is based on the character of God and God’s justice is a reflection of His character none can argue that God’s punishment of sin is arbitrary or excessive. When God created people He warned Adam and Eve they would die if they sinned against Him. The death foretold begins with separation from God. Separation from God is the natural result of sin because God is holy to such a degree that He cannot possibly have any fellowship, friendship or relationship with that which is tainted by sin. (Leviticus 20:7; Psalm 5:4-5; Habakkuk 1:13; Revelation 21:27) The infinite holiness of God demands His wrath be leveled against all who commit sin. (Psalm 11:4-7; Psalm 34:15-16) Eternal suffering is the inevitable result of separation from God and falling under the wrath of God. God’s justice is not an arbitrary determination but the logical consequence of sin against the infinitely holy God. For God to change these consequences would be to violate His own justice. If God is in any way unjust then He cannot in any way be good.

Some will concede that God is just for punishing sin but it would be better if He were merciful to all men. The assertion effectively becomes that God is not good because He insists on justice. God would be good if He overlooked what is just to do what is loving. This argument falls down on the premise that something can be unjust and good. Injustice is never a good thing. Injustice may have a show of kindness to some, but it is inherently cruel to others. The response to recent officer involved shootings of children and adolescents illustrates this very well. Supposing an officer of the law carelessly caused the death of an innocent child, it would be evil to allow him to escape the legitimate consequence of his actions. The parents, the community and the police force would all be harmed by the denial of justice. If there are no consequences for ones actions and no retribution for the great wrongs done in this world then a persons actions in life are ultimately meaningless and God is the most evil being imaginable. For God to be good, He must also be unfailingly just.

Some believe that in making the promise of salvation God is promising to be unjust. A famous preacher recently said that God “broke the law for love”. Salvation in not unjust. The justice of God is in no way compromised by His promise of salvation. Salvation is not God’s promise to ignore a person’s sin if that person asks for forgiveness. God has never offered to forget about evil. God always punishes evil. The justice of God that always punishes sin and the mercy of God that offers salvation to men has provided a substitute to bear the punishment of sin so that sinful men will not have to bear that punishment themselves. The cross is the place where God’s mercy and justice are perfectly mingled. At the cross, God’s justice was satisfied and God’s mercy overflowed to all who would believe. At the cross mankind sees the full extent of the goodness of God goodness that is in no way contradictory to justice. A God who does not always punish evil is not the god of the Bible. A God who would not send men to hell would be unjust and evil.

Standard

Posted by

Posted on

March 25, 2016

Posted under

God

What is the moral argument for the existence of God?

In classical apologetics there are four common philosophical arguments for the existence of God. The first argument is entirely cognitive, the ontological argument. The cosmological and teleological arguments formulate their first premises from nature. The fourth argument does not rely upon reason or creation but conscience. The moral argument says that because everyone has a perception of right and wrong, there must be One who has created in all humanity an understanding of morality.

The moral argument has the briefest formulation of all the philosophical arguments. An objective morality exists in this world. The best explanation for this objective standard is God. Therefore, God exists. A variation of this argument is seen in the existence of measures of goodness. Humanity makes determinations about the goodness and excellence of things. Since there exists the ability to measure excellence, there must be that which is of highest excellence. This highest good is God.

The most common expression starts with the recognition that generally all human populations hold to similar standards of right and wrong. For example prohibitions against murder, theft and deception are common. Even in those situations where a people group holds a different standard of right and wrong, there is still a recognition of some standard of right wrong. Because everyone knows some things are right and some things are wrong there must be a universal basis for the existence of the human conscience. The best explanation as the basis of the conscience is God.

Natural explanations for morality struggle to explain the conscience of man, especially the existence of an altruistic standard. The selfless sacrifice for the benefit of others doesn’t quite fit in a system in which a species is best helped by the fittest members surviving to pass on their genes. Altruism is undeniably common in humanity and can often be found in the animal kingdom. Naturalists have offered varying explanation for the existence of altruism. Many of them offer models by which altruism benefits the survival of the species. For many observers the naturalistic explanations of altruism are not very convincing. A Divine, moral being best explains the existence of selfless love found throughout much of humanity.

Romans 2 appeals to the moral argument. Paul says when those who do not know the law of God do those things commanded in the law then they show the law of God is written in their hearts. However, Paul does not use this argument as proof of the existence of God. Paul presupposes the existence of God and the existence of an objective moral standard. Paul instead uses the moral argument to show the guilt of every person. Because everyone has a conception of right and wrong none can stand before God ignorant of the law or innocent according to the law. Everyone has done that which violates their own conscience and, more importantly, which violates the absoluate standard of God’s law. This leads to the inevitable conviction, “There is none righteous”. Because all are guilty before God the only hope for men is forgiveness of sin through faith in Jesus.

Standard

Posted by

Posted on

March 23, 2016

Posted under

Creation, God, Origins

What is the teological argument for the existence of God?

Two major philosophical arguments from nature are proposed as proofs for the existence of God, the cosmological argument and the teleological argument. The teleological argument is probably the easiest of the major philosophical arguments. It seeks to show that because the world has the appearance of being designed, there must be a designer.

Many observers see the appearance of design in the universe. The orderliness and complexity of the universe is analogous to the complex orderliness of man made objects. As a result the universe has the hallmarks of being designed. If the universe has been designed, then there must exist a Designer great enough and powerful enough to produce all that exists.

Probably the most familiar expression of this argument is the watchmaker analogy. If a person walking through an empty field were to suddenly find a watch laying upon the ground, he would conclude the watch was designed by a watchmaker. He would not assume the watch formed by natural, unguided processes. Because the universe is vastly more complicated than a watch it is logical to conclude the universe was designed by a Creator of vast intelligence.

One common proof offered for the argument from design is irreducible complexity. The evolutionary hypothesis explains the growth of life by a gradual, step by step process. The premise of irreducible complexity is some things found in nature cannot be explained by a step by step process of adding onepiece of information at a time. For example, a mousetrap is a device that cannot function if only one small part is removed. Some examples of irreducible complexity in the natural world are the eye, the bombadier beetle and the cell. These things cannot have arisen naturally by gradually adding information. Without all the parts present the organism would not function.

This argument has some Biblical foundation because the Bible uses the argument from design in at least two places, Psalm 19 and Romans 1. An argument similar to the teleological argument can also be found in the books of Isaiah, Jeremiah and Ezekiel to show God is Creator of all and consequently is greater than all idols. However, the Bible never uses the obvious reality of a Creator to prove the existence of God. The Old Testament argues from creation to show the greatness of God and the folly of worshiping other gods. In Romans 1 the teleological argument is used as an indictment against those who have rejected God. Instead of worshiping God as they ought, unbelieving men have rejected nature’s obvious declaration of God’s existence and power. Unbelieving men replace God with gods of their devising and are under the judgment of God. God is the only creator of all. He has made His power and Deity evident through the handiwork of His creation. He must be worshiped.

Standard

Posted by

Posted on

March 18, 2016

Posted under

Creation, God

What is the cosmological argument for the existence of God?

In classical apologetics two major arguments for the existence of God are based upon observations of the natural world. The teleological argument argues that the evidence of design in the world is evidence of a God who created it all. The cosmological argument argues that because the universe exists it must have a beginning and a Being who brought it into existence.

The longer form of the cosmological argument begins with the statement that the physical universe exists. Everything that exists in the physical realm must have a cause. The cause cannot be the universe itself. The cause must exist outside the universe and have the ability to bring the universe into existence. The cause that brought the universe into existence is God. Because the universe exists, God exists.

This argument finds support in the observations of science. No natural mechanism is known by which something can arise from nothing. The normal arrangement of the world shows the things that exist in the physical world have their source in things with an earlier existence. Everything we observe is contingent upon an ancestor or a creator. The first law of thermodynamics seems to support this argument with its declaration that energy cannot be created or destroyed. Since the physical universe exists and it could not have risen from nothing it must have a source great enough to bring the universe into existence.

Like other arguments from classical apologetics the cosmological argument is primarily a philosophical argument. The proofs offered by this argument are not based upon physical evidences for an act of creation, but upon the logical necessity of a causative agent bringing the universe into existence. This argument is easier to understand and explain than the ontological argument because it is based upon premises which are more familiar to the average person. This line of reasoning may be reflected in Psalm 19, “The heavens declare the glory of God and the firmament sheweth His handywork.” All creation speaks to the necessity of a Creator. Because this universe exists there must be One who brought it into existence. To know the nature of this Creator a person must turn to the Bible. Genesis 1:1 simply states, “In the beginning God created the heaven and the earth.” The reality of God can be glimpsed in creation, but the character of God is only found in the Bible. He has revealed Himself clearly through His Word. God’s command to all men is to believe His Word.

Standard

Posted by

Posted on

March 16, 2016

Posted under

God

What is the ontological argument for the existence of God?

Those who attempt to defend the claims of the Bible generally use a couple major types of arguments. One group is called presuppositionalism, or presuppositional apologetics.  arguments. The person presupposes the claims of the Bible to be true and then offers evidences to support that starting principle. The other group is called classical apologetics. The person attempts to show evidences for the claims of the Bible or the existence of God by using independent arguments for the existence of God and the reliability of the Bible.

Classical arguments for the existence of God include the teleological, cosmological, moral and ontological arguments. The ontological argument is different from the others because it offers evidence for God based only upon the philosophical reasonings of man. No proofs outside the thoughts of man are offered. Because of this the ontological argument can be challenging to understand. It is a logical and philosophical argument likely to be appreciated by someone who has studied those systems. The ontological argument can be briefly stated.  Nothing can be imagined that is greater than God, therefore God must exist.

The ontological argument is not an empirical argument. It does not offer claims that can be examined using the scientific method. It does not make claims that can be supported by external evidence. The ontological argument seeks to show the existence of God based upon the definition of God. It is believed that Anselm, the Archbishop of Canterbury during the 11th century, first formulated this argument. The argument has been made in a couple different ways, but the strongest seems to be this:

  • God, by definition, is a being greater than any other which can be imagined (No one can imagine a being greater than God)
  • A being which exists in thought and in reality is greater than a being which exists only in the imagination
  • If God exists only in thought, then men can devise a being which is greater than God
  • No one can devise a being greater than God (we cannot imagine a being greater than the greatest being imaginable)
  • Because men have a conception of God and can imagine none greater, God must exist.

To state the argument another way; the God of the Bible is conceived as having all perfections. He is infinite in being, eternal in existence and limitless in knowledge, might and presence. None can imagine a being that is greater than God. If God is that which is greater than any imagination of man, God must exist.

This argument is limited by a proper definition of God- a person can easily imagine a being greater than the god Thor, but one cannot imagine a being greater than the infinitely perfect God of the Bible, and it is limited by the philosophical complexity of the argument. Some have accused the ontological argument of being little more than an elaborate word game. The biggest problem with the ontological argument is its total reliance on human reasoning to attempt to deduce the existence of God. Because of the corruption of sin upon the mind of men none will turn to God by the power of logic. The Word of God makes that clear the things of God cannot be discerned by the unsaved man apart from the work of the Holy Spirit. (2 Corinthians 2:14) There is no being greater than God. We know of His existence and His greatness because He has made Himself known to man. In His grace God has given us His Word which tells us of His glory.

Standard

Posted by

Posted on

March 11, 2016

Posted under

God

Arguments for God

Recent conversations with a reader of this blog have prompted me to mention several of the major philosophical arguments for the existence of God. These arguments are not proofs in the empirical and evidential sense. They are philosophical proofs intended to show the belief in a supreme being is logical. There is, in fact, no direct proof for God’s existence. Instead there are logical deductions based upon reasonable inferences. These arguments seek to show the plausibility or necessity of a God by citing secondary evidences for God. These arguments are mostly cause and effect arguments that surmise because a particular reality is true there must be a Deity greater than reality who brought it into existence. In this article I will briefly explain four major philosophical arguments for the existence of God. These arguments merely argue for the existence of an all powerful deity without describing the character of God. I do not offer these explanations as an attempt to prove the existence of God, but to acquaint the reader with the basics of some of the most common arguments for God. Future articles will explain in more detail the particulars of each line of reasoning.

Ontological argument:
The ontological argument is an argument about the nature of being. This argument can be summarized as “nothing can be imagined that is greater than God, therefore God must exist.” The ontological argument relies on no outside evidences but draws its conclusion from what is possible for man to conceive. This argument is a proposition that is entirely conceptual, an argument from imagination. Because man conceives of an infiniitely perfect God who exists, and because it is impossible for man to conceive of anything greater than a a God of infinite perfections, then such a God must exist.

Teleological argument:
The teleological argument is also called the argument from design. The world shows evidence of design, therefore there must be a Designer. In daily living when one sees an orderly system that accomplishes a specific function the observer naturally concludes it has been designed. (A watch found lying in the woods is not believed to have evolved in those woods, but manufactured by watchmaker.) Randomness or lack of functionality shows lack of design. Because the universe as a whole and living creatures in particular are orderly and functional there must be a great Designer who created it all.

Cosmological argument:
The cosmological argument is an argument from the existence of a physical universe. Everything in the universe has to have a beginning, therefore there must exist a Being outside the universe that brought it into existence. Observational science has shown that something cannot come from nothing. The universe is something and thus could not have come from nothing. Because the universe exists, there must exist a Creator who brought all things into existence.

Moral argument:
The moral argument is an argument from the conscience of man. Since everyone has a perception of right and wrong, there must be a Lawgiver who has built into the heart of every person a basic moral understanding. Without a Supreme Being there would be no universal concept of right and wrong. Without a Lawgiver morals would be subjective and changing based upon the interests of the person or the society. Because there is cross cultural, multi-generational agreement upon basic concepts of right and wrong there must be One who placed the moral law in the heart of all men.

These logical arguments can help understand if belief in God is reasonable. Deductions from nature, reason and conscience can help discern the plausibility of asserting the existence of an all powerful Deity. While such arguments may be helpful, the Christian does not need to “prove” God exists. The Bible itself does not seek to prove God’s existence. Scripture declares the existence of God. “In the beginning God created.” The Bible asserts God’s existence and demands its claims be believed.

Standard

Posted by

Posted on

February 26, 2016

Posted under

God, The Bible

Comments

7 Comments

Do people not believe the Bible because of a lack of evidence?

Today’s essay is a follow up to the article I posted Wednesday and to some of the replies given to that article. One commenter said, “repeating a story is not going to convince an atheist to start believing it.” I agree. One who has rejected the Bible is not likely to suddenly start believing because of a restatement of the Biblical stories. Should Christians seek to find proofs that will conclusively show the Bible to be true and dependable?

Many proofs of Christianity can be shown, and proofs have been given over and over again. Evidences can be given, but is that the real issue? Do those who reject the Bible refuse to believe because the evidence is not convincing? As I said in the previous article, lack of information is not the problem. Nor is lack of evidence the problem. The reason for unbelief is simple. Unbelievers start from the presupposition that the claims of the Bible are not true.

Everyone brings a personal bias to truth claims and the supporting evidences offered. Evidence is always filtered through the hearer’s own worldview. Those who assert that truth can be discovered only through naturalistic means are expressing a presupposition about truth. Naturalism presupposes there is no spiritual agency at work in this world. It presupposes the absence of a Creator, a Divine plan or an eternal purpose. No one examines evidence in a completely impartial fashion. Every evidence is viewed from the foundational assumptions of the viewer. As a result, God is not proven or disproven based upon increased evidence or a recitation of the facts

Those who refuse to believe the Bible will not believe regardless of what evidences are presented to them. This is declared in Luke 16. Jesus tells of a rich man who dies and goes to hell. He asks Abraham to send one back from the dead to warn his brothers. Abraham respond, “They have Moses and the prophets; let them hear them.” The rich man says his brothers will not believe the Bible. Abraham replies, “Neither will they be persuaded, though one rose from the dead.” Even the most irrefutable evidence of Divine power will not convince those who have refused to believe the truth of the Bible. This is born out further in the life of Jesus. When Jesus raised Lazarus from the dead the Pharisees response to the undeniable miracle was to plot the death of Jesus in attempt to prevent others from believing. When Jesus rose from the dead the priests knew He had been restored to life but they bribed the Roman guards to spread the story that the disciples had stolen His body. The evidence did not change the heart. Those who refuse to believe, will not be persuaded by the most convincing evidence.

From the human perspective the repetition of the Bible will not change the presuppositions of another. Yet there is no hope for faith apart from the Word of God. True faith is only produced by the supernatural working of the Holy Spirit in the heart of the person. Until the spiritual eyes are opened the heart will remain blinded. Only when God gives sight can the spiritually blind see the truth of the Son of God. Until then no evidence in the world will change the mind of the one who refuses to believe.

Standard

Posted by

Posted on

February 24, 2016

Posted under

God, Heaven, Salvation

If God wants everyone to go to heaven, why doesn’t He make it clear how to get there?

This question was posed by one who does not believe god exists as an argument against the reality of God. If God really exists and really wants everyone to go to heaven, why is there so much confusion about how to get to heaven? If God is all powerful and infinitely wise, why doesn’t He tell everyone how to get to heaven? Among professing Christian churches there is disagreement about how to reach heaven. Some teach salvation is received by faith alone, some teach good works are required for salvation, others teach baptism is necessary and still others teach that salvation is dependent on attending the proper church. Beside the disagreements between Christian churches are the many different religions in the world that teach many different ways to heaven and present many different versions of heaven. If God really wants us all to go to heaven, why are there so many contradictory opinions about to how to get there? Wouldn’t a loving God make the way to heaven very clear?

This question may seem to be a strong argument against God. It is not much different from the old atheistic declaration, “If God exists, I want Him to prove it by striking me dead with lightning right now.” Arguments like this are breathtakingly arrogant. What reasonable person would expect the all powerful God to do what I want when I want Him to do it? More importantly, a thoughtful consideration of the Bible’s teaching leaves no doubt that God has made the message of the gospel very clear. Throughout all of human history God has been actively revealing Himself and the message of salvation to the world. As soon as Adam and Eve sinned God promised a Savior. As the human population expanded, the message of salvation continued to be preached. Noah’s massive building program was a platform to preach the truth about God. Later, after the flood, God called Abraham out for Himself to be the father of a nation which would be the centerpiece of the display of His power, glory and truth. Since the generation after Christ, the Bible has been the clear record of salvation declaring the gospel to all men. The problem has never been a lack of information, but a rejection of the truth.

The account of Cain and Abel gives a perfect example fo the problem. Both Cain and Abel almost certainly knew what God required of them. Cain rejected the truth about God and of what God wanted. He did not lack information, he rejected the truth he was told. Today, the confusion and disagreement among Christian churches stems from a willful misunderstanding of the truth. Man’s rejection of God and refusal to believe the gospel is not from lack of information. Men do not believe because they do not want to believe the truth. The Bible is not unclear. The message of salvation is declared with all plainness throughout the New Testament. Verses like Romans 10:13, “For whosoever shall call upon the name of the Lord shall be saved.”; Ephesians 2:8-9, “For by grace are ye saved through faith; and that not of yourselves: it is the gift of God: Not of works, lest any man should boast.”; and John 3:16, “For God so loved the world that He gave His only begotten Son that whosoever believeth in Him should not perish but have everlasting life.” state the gospel in crystal clear terms. God has made the message of salvation plain for any to understand. He is “not willing that any should perish but that all should come to repentance.” (2 Peter 3:9)