John3 and Romans2: Part2

[Evang.Benincasa]

Originally Posted by donfriesen1

I'm rightly slapped down and put in my place when shown as having little faith in a mighty, mighty God. Yet I would say this in my defence: Israel was ordained to be a kingdom of priests. Ex 19.6 When he says that they are priests I read it as saying the whole kingdom would be acting as priests of sorts, but not all like the Levitical. As sitting in the crossroads of three continents they were uniquely positioned to share the truth of God to them, but what of N and S America, Australia and the isles; and the souls therein. Yet Israel did a poor job in this mediatorial (priests) role. If the gifts and callings of God are without repentance then what happens when those called to implement God's plan fail? The job doesn't get done, and the world isn't educated in what the Lord wanted to do through Israel -- share the Word. What then of those who never hear from those called to share? God must have an alternate plan for all those who he loves and wishes to bring to heaven, but don't ever hear because the Jew has failed their priestly calling. In his omniscience and foreknowledge God had made a plan for those he loved, the Gentile who doesn't have the knowledge of God because the Jew fails to execute the plan God had put in place. In his foreknowledge the plan which compensated for the Jew's failings was the installation of the conscience. Its role obviously can't ever completely substitute for that which the Jew fails to do but does partially compensate by being a tudor to right living. Could it not be said that the conscience is at work every day as God's tudor, striving to bring the Gentile into right-living, which is the goal of the Gospel or the law, perhaps in compensation for the lack of the knowledge of God the Jew failed to provide. If not fully compensating, then at least partially? Paul speaks of these in Ro2.12-16. They have not the law. Yet they show the work of the law in their hearts. How has the work of the law in their heart been effected? By means of what Paul calls 'nature', which, reading between the lines, in these verses is the conscience.

You reference Ro1.20-21 which talks about the natural world 'speaking to Man who doesn't have the Word. (I've referenced this scripture in my posts in this thread) It speaks what the Word would do if it were present: there is a God. God uses the natural world to strive with Man, uses the conscience to strive with Man, uses his Spirit to strive with Man. As you say "they tend to refuse to respond to the call". Some without the Word respond, be it only conscience they respond to. Short of a miracle, any of these who responds who is thousands of miles and oceans away from Israel will never get to hear the knowledge of God from a Jew. Hypothetically, our faith in God tells us this miracle is possible. We also see examples in the Word showing how God reached some (who play a critical role in the plan of God which may have necessitated extraordinary means to reach them), which doesn't indicate that these same means will be used to reach all those in the same circumstance. But we live in a practical world and my practical mind tells me it is unlikely if the way God ordained to achieve this, the Jew, fails to do its job, that it will happen. God will then resort to a plan B: allowing any righteously-acting Gentile who has responded only to their conscience, into heaven on the merits of their conscience. A just and a caring God doesn't leave any of them dangling without any hope but makes provision for them throught the conscience. If not, then the conscience isn't doing its job and the Lord has wasted his efforts and skills putting it into Man.

Many on this thread quote profusely the scriptures which apply truthfully to those who have heard the Gospel -- they have the Word and will be judged by the Word. But what of those who haven't heard the Word? Paul also says that those before the Law don't have their sin imputed. The principle here is that those who haven't heard the Word don't get judged by the Word and don't get their sin imputed to them in Judgment. Why can't the same principle be applied to the Gospel -- that all those who have never heard the Gospel won't have the rules of the Gospel applied to them. Why does moving into the Church Age suddenly result in, as many commenters in the thread contend, any and all (even those living right by the conscience) will go to hell even if they've never, ever heard the Word in any form. The principle of "not imputing when someone hasn't heard" should be the same whether it is before the Law, in the Law or in Gospel. Why should it be thought that this principle only applies to one Age and not all Ages? What prevents the thought that it is not a universal principle for all people of all times? Those who have not heard will not have their sin imputed.

I contend the Word shows: God will judge by the conscience, those few who have never heard the Word in any form, by that internal "Word of God" called the conscience, given to all living in all Ages. If the Gospel is the only means of determining righteousness for entrance to heaven, then why does he use the conscience to Judge men's secret thoughts? He does not leave himself without a witness to truth and will not be seen to judge unfairly on that Great Day.

Paul says in Ro2.12-16 that those with a clean conscience get into heaven. Amen, good teaching Don.

Don, you are as lost as a potato.

Anyway, show me the verse which says “church age?”