Question
Can you give me some encouragement as I deal with increasing attacks upon “the gospel of Christ” coming from ‘religious rationalism’ and ‘Christian rationalism’ which particularly denounce the idea that ‘the only road to God is through Jesus Christ’ and instead preach things like ‘religious pluralism’ ‘all religious roads lead to God and heaven’ etc., etc.?
Response
All of this is also a natural part of the evolution of man’s ungodliness in general (and particularly of its religious component) as well as being a natural part of the evolution of Christian ungodliness. In fact, as both the world’s and Christian ungodliness evolve during this present dispensation of God’s grace, instead of getting wider and wider apart they actually get closer and closer together. And of course, this is because of the ungodliness belonging to both, which by nature seeks to come together and eventually does. Hence even though historically they have had the basic appearance of being at odds with each other, they eventually began to move more and more towards one another and to manifest common thinking and the like. And historically speaking the more each has evolved the closer together they have become, with the result that they have manifested more and more commonness. Right now, at this point in the present dispensation of God’s grace, they are very close together, and are boldly manifesting that they have very much in common. And one of the ways by which they are doing this is by their agreement that the beliefs and teachings of ‘Christian fundamentalism’ are intolerant as well as intolerable. In accordance with this they both make “the gospel of Christ” a target of their attacks, declaring it to be morally/ethically wrong and impossible; and in its place preaching their gospel of ‘religious pluralism’ based upon their own preferred ideas and dictates as to what they think God is like, and regarding how they think that He must act and what He must do.
Wherefore, it should come as no surprise to you, that (as this present evil world evolves and as it goes about cleansing itself of all that it considers to be the ‘filth’ of its past) it has now become increasingly engaged in trying to cleanse itself of the ‘filth’ of anything that is manifestly contrary to its supposedly progressive and more intelligent philosophies regarding man and God. And its ‘more intelligent philosophies’ are all about inclusiveness, pluralism, universalism, and the like. Hence “the gospel of Christ” has to be denounced by them, and those that stand for it and/or preach it must likewise be denounced and put to shame for their intolerant religious bigotry. Hence this is the very thing that is actively being promoted today, and to which we are increasingly being subjected.
Now, once again, I am not telling you anything about which you are not already aware. But I am just saying these things to simply underscore that these increasing attacks are exactly what we should expect; and that they too (along with the atheistic component of man’s ungodliness) will only keep on increasing and getting worse and worse as the dispensation of God’s grace remains in effect. Plus, they will only keep on becoming more and more bold, and even threatening, as well.
As you mentioned, one of the typical arguments and forms of philosophizing that come from ‘Christian rationalism,’ is to tell us that ‘God will not, or cannot, condemn people to hell who have not believed in Jesus Christ through no fault of their own.’ Or to insist that ‘as long as someone is a good person, and believes in God, that God will accept him regardless of whether he is a Jew, or Muslim, or Buddhist, or Hindu, or whatever’. Or to otherwise rationalize that belief in “the gospel of Christ” is not necessary for salvation and so insist that ‘all good people are accepted with God and will go to heaven’. Now when it comes to dealing with any of these ‘rationalistic arguments’ and those who espouse them, there is one common denominator to them all that makes dealing with them a chore, so to speak. And of course, that common denominator is that they are all based upon ‘humanistic/rationalistic thinking’ and not upon the final and absolute authority of what God says in His written word. In fact, more times than not each and every one of these ‘rationalistic arguments’ comes from someone (whether he be a Christian in name or not) who does not ‘stand upon’ the Bible as the infallible, inerrant, and perfect word of God, and who therefore does not submit to it as “the word of truth” and as his final, absolute authority. Hence dealing with them is ‘a chore’, because their authority is their rationalism and not what God says in His word. And besides this, more times than not they want us to argue with them and to present our case based solely upon rationalism, and to leave the Bible out of it.
So if you are going to deal with someone who operates upon ‘Christian rationalism’ then most likely you will not be able to present to him an ‘acceptable answer’ to his rationalism; even though what you present to him is from the Bible and is the truth of the matter. For his rationalism has already pronounced itself to be the authority, and in so doing it has deemed that the Bible’s testimony is faulty, without authority, and is not to be taken seriously; and so its testimony will be treated as inadmissible and unacceptable to him. Wherefore when it comes to dealing with the arguments of ‘Christian rationalism’ you end up dealing with arguments and reasoning that are mainly based on faulty assumptions, erroneous ideas, misinformation, dis-information, rejection of the truth, emotionalism, and the like, and not on the truth of what God says in His word.
One of the classic arguments of ‘Christian rationalism’ is the one you mentioned, which basically states that ‘there are thousands upon thousands of Muslims, Jews, and others in the world who are very religious and are good people, but who have had no chance to believe the gospel of Christ. Therefore, it is unconscionable to think that God would condemn them to hell when they are good people, who simply have not believed in Christ.’ And as you also mentioned, this argument is often accompanied by a lot of emotion and sentiment. But as I just pointed out, as with most anything that comes from ‘Christian rationalism’ it is based upon ignorance of the truth, as well as upon rejection of the truth. And in this particular case, it is primarily ignorant of the truth of what God says in His word concerning all of the provisions that He makes for all people to find the knowledge of the truth about Him and of their condition in His sight. And then for them to know this truth and to be able to believe it to their benefit, including the obtaining of further light of truth from Him.
Very simply put, God makes it evident in the Scriptures that He ‘bends over backwards’ to provide everyone with the opportunity to be saved from the debt and penalty of their sins. In other words, He not only has made provision for their salvation through the redemption that is in Christ Jesus and has sent out His gospel into all the world and has made provision “that all the Gentiles might hear” but also in accordance with Him being the One “who will have all men to be saved, and to come to the knowledge of the truth” God also has made it so that everyone has ample opportunity to ‘seek’ Him and ‘find’ Him. And in connection with this He has made it so that He is able to deal with them on the basis of further light of truth so that they can then have the opportunity to believe the very truth whereby they can be justified by Him. Paul, for example, testifies that God does of all of this in what he declared to the men of Athens as related in Acts 17. And, of course, it is also described in detail in “the gospel of Christ” itself, especially in what is set forth in Romans 1:18-32 pertaining to the ‘light of God-consciousness’ and the ‘light of wrath-consciousness’ which God mercifully provides to every man.
Now even though what I have just said simply points out the basic truth of what God has done, but does not describe it in detail by any means, nevertheless the fact of it is sufficient to show that God makes ample provision for every man to be able to place himself in the position whereby God will be able to deal with him further; i.e. will be able to deal with him beyond the point of simply giving him the fundamental light of God-consciousness and wrath-consciousness. And if a person will respond positively and properly to the fundamental light that God provides, then God will be able to expose him to further light of truth, and to the opportunity to believe the very issue of truth whereby he can be justified by Him.
So then, as I have put it. God indeed does ‘bend over backwards’ to provide every person with the opportunity to be saved from the debt and penalty of their sins. Wherefore He is not ‘mean’ or ‘ruthless’ or ‘unjust’ or ‘unfair’ by any means when it comes condemning any man. Instead God is exceedingly merciful and good in making it so that no man needs to be condemned under the debt and penalty of his sins, and in providing every man with the fundamental light of truth to which he can choose to respond positively if he so desires, and thereby can ‘start on the road to salvation,’ so to speak. But likewise, God is also perfectly Just and Righteousness in condemning any and every man to the punishment of paying the penalty of his own sins, if he chooses to respond negatively in any way to the fundamental light of truth that God has given to him. For such a person freely chooses to respond negatively to the fundamental light of the truth, and in so doing he also chooses to refuse to allow God to provide him with the further light of truth whereby he can be saved.
Now from the time that sin entered the world and man needed to be saved, down through the time of God’s program with Israel in “time past” and now also during the time of this present dispensation of His grace to the world, the testimony of God’s word is that the majority of men respond negatively to the fundamental light that God gives. In fact, in this present dispensation of God’s grace “the gospel of Christ” proclaims this very thing at its outset when it declares that “the wrath of God is revealed from heaven against all ungodliness and unrighteousness of men, who hold the truth in unrighteousness”. And therefore, the truth of the matter is that the majority of men purposely choose to “hold the truth in unrighteousness” and that in so doing they choose to pursue a relationship with God that is not based upon the truth, but that is based upon their rejection of the truth in preference for something else that they deem more acceptable, agreeable, and pleasant to them. And as God testifies in His word, and in “the gospel of Christ” in particular, all the various religions of men are the inventions of men who have ‘held the truth in unrighteousness’; and every persistent adherent to any of the various religions of men is an individual who himself is personally ‘holding the truth in unrighteousness’ and keeps on doing so.
Now all of this is what, both the world’s religious rationalism and ‘Christian rationalism’ does not acknowledge or understand, and does not submit to, because of their ignorance and their rejection of the truth of what God says in His word. Hence, they argue as they do and say what they do. But the testimony of God’s word is the truth, regardless of what the world’s religious rationalism or ‘Christian rationalism’ thinks and says. And as I also just pointed out, the testimony of God’s word is that since the time that sin entered the world (and despite the riches of God’s goodness in giving fundamental light unto all) the majority of men always “hold the truth in unrighteousness” and they choose rather to pursue a relationship with God that is not based upon the truth. In so doing they do not ‘obey the truth’, which means that they choose not to put themselves in the position of allowing God to give them further light and the opportunity to believe the truth whereby they can be saved from the debt and penalty of their sins.
And one of the most common ways in which men “hold the truth in unrighteousness” and choose to pursue a relationship with God that is not based upon the truth (and that therefore has them refusing to allow God to give them any more light) is by pursuing a religious relationship with God in which they endeavor to establish their own righteousness in God’s sight by the performance of their own good works. This is what every religion (past, present, and future) is all about to some degree, and is what every one endeavors to have its adherents do. Which, of course, also means that since they value their own righteousness they think that God does too. And just like those in Israel who thought this, they have a ‘zeal of God, but not according to knowledge’ and accordingly they too see no need for God to fully undertake for them in order to provide for them to have His righteousness. Which in turn means that they see no need for a “Christ”; i.e. a redeemer; nor would they have any proper and positive response to Him as such if they heard of Him, or were told about Him.
So despite the humanistic arguments and imaginations of religious and ‘Christian rationalism’ the truth of the matter is that the good works and the ‘good people’ of the various religions of men are not the result of the people in these religions responding positively and properly to the truth. They are not people who are truly responding positively to God and His truth, for which reason He ought to respond to them by saving them because of how good they are. Instead the good works and good people of the religions of men are the result of people “holding the truth in unrighteousness,” who in so doing are ignoring and/or rejecting the truth about God’s own perfect righteousness, and holiness, and justice, along with rejecting the truth about their own ungodliness and unrighteousness and sinfulness, as well as rejecting the truth about their own inability to make themselves acceptable to God by means of their good works and religious deeds. They are the result of people responding negatively to the fundamental light of truth that God has provided them with, and in so doing repudiating their need for a redeemer and his redemptive work for them, and instead going about trying to establish their own righteousness in God’s sight by their good works and by being good people. And as was pointed out, the Bible’s testimony is that this is what the majority of men always choose to do.
God ‘bends over backwards’ to make it so that anyone can be saved; and to also make it so that no man has an excuse for ‘not knowing the truth and not responding positively to it’. And understanding and appreciating the reality of this, along with understanding the details of what God does and the mechanics of how it effectually operates in every man, is the ‘key’ so to speak, when it comes to answering and dismissing the ignorant arguments and faulty reasoning of ‘religious and Christian rationalism’. God indeed does ‘bend over backwards’ which He does by first of all providing every person with both the provision and the opportunity to respond positively to Him by responding positively to the basic ‘light of the truth about Him and about them’ that He gives to every man. In doing this God provides every person with the opportunity to choose to put themselves in the position where they can receive further light of truth from Him, to which if they continue to respond positively includes them also being confronted with the knowledge of the specific truth whereby God can justify them in His sight, if they will be fully persuaded of it and believe it. However, even though this is what God does (and is what He has done right from the time that sin entered the world and man needed to be saved) the testimony of God’s word is that far more people respond negatively to the basic light that God provides than choose to respond positively to it. In doing this far more people choose to have a relationship with God that is not based upon the truth, but that is based upon their own preferred ideas. This has been the case in “time past” and it is also true right now during this present dispensation of God’s grace. (In fact, this is true even with respect to God’s own nation of Israel. For the testimony of God’s word is that in just about any generation throughout Israel’s program only a remnant of them are justified in God’s sight.) Wherefore the truth of the matter is that more people will remain unjustified and unsaved than will become justified in God’s sight and be saved from the debt and penalty of their sins.
Now, as we also noted, one of the most common kinds of man’s faulty and error-based relationships with God is that of a religious relationship, in which people who do not respond positively to the basic truth about God’s perfect righteousness go about trying to establish their own righteousness in God’s sight by the performance of good works, good deeds, religious rites and acts of piety, and in general being good people. This is what the members of every religious system in the world are endeavoring to do to some degree. For according to Romans 1:18ff, every religious system has been, or is, founded by one(s) who responded negatively to the light of God-consciousness and wrath-consciousness, and every religious system is based upon the thinking that a person needs to establish his own righteousness in God’s sight in order to be acceptable to God.
So then the good works and ‘good people’ of the various religious systems of the world (both in the past and now) are not well pleasing in God’s sight. (Of course, this is something that is scoffed at and denied as outrageous by the rationalistic and humanistic thinking of ‘religious and Christian rationalism’. But it is the truth nevertheless, and its denial is at the root of their blindness to the truth of the gospel.) For they are not the activities and lives of ones who are responding positively to the light of God-consciousness, and to the light of sin-consciousness, and to the light of wrath-consciousness that God has provided. Instead, they have ‘a zeal of God, but it is not according to the knowledge of the truth’. And because it is not according to the knowledge of the truth, but is according to their own preferred and imagined ideas, they therefore go about seeking to establish their own righteousness in God’s sight; just like religious Israel did, and still does. But God will not accept their good works and the deeds of their own righteousness. For man’s righteousness is completely unacceptable to God, as not only His Law declares and affirms, but as is also testified to by the conscience of any one who responds positively to the light of wrath-consciousness that God has provided. In fact every religious man’s attempts to establish his own righteousness before God is a direct repudiation by him of the perfection of God’s Righteousness and His Holiness and His perfect Justice, and hence it is also a rejection of the truth of his need for a redeemer.
Now this is the truth of the matter, just as the Bible (especially the details of “the gospel of Christ” set forth in Romans 1:16ff) testifies, regardless of the claims and bleating of ‘religious and Christian rationalism’ with their ‘religious pluralism,’ and doctrines of ‘inclusiveness’ and even universalism. In fact each of the arguments from ‘religious and Christian rationalism’ that you have cited comes from their ignorance of what we have been going over, and from their vain imaginations of what they think about God and man, and especially from their negative response to the truth of what God says about man’s sin and about any man’s inability to make himself acceptable to God by means of his own good works, no matter how sincere and/or religious he may try to be.
Wherefore, when it comes to you not being troubled, or shaken, or disturbed, by their rationalistic arguments (or to you being able to respond to them) you, yourself, need to become more and more familiar with the things that we have only briefly gone over. For I have only spoken about these things in a very general way, choosing to describe them simply as being the answer to the arguments of ‘religious and Christian rationalism’ but not describing them in detail. Nonetheless by knowing and understanding more and more about what God says that He does to make it so that every person can be saved, and more and more about how the light that He provides operates in a person depending upon how a person responds to it, you in turn will see more and more how that the arguments and claims of ‘religious and Christian rationalism’ are riddled with the faults and errors of their rationalistic thinking, and that they are woefully ignorant of the truth of what God says. As I just remarked in the preceding paragraph, the answer to every one of their arguments that you have cited is found in what God says that He has done to make it so that anyone can be saved, and in the details of “the gospel of Christ” itself set forth in Romans 1:16ff. Hence the more you understand and appreciate these things, the more you will be able to confidently respond to their faulty arguments, and not be bothered or disturbed either by their claims or by their reproach.
Keith Blades
Enjoy The Bible Ministries
20070116 A38 W V G h j a bn tc