One of my biggest hangups as a Christian back in the day was the concept that only those that believed in Jesus would be saved. This lead to the obvious question what about all the people that died prior to his birth, or that were simply born in the wrong time or place to even hear about him?

In answer to this I've ofter heard Romans 1:18-20 often thrown out as knee jerk refutation.

18The wrath of God is being revealed from heaven against all the godlessness and wickedness of men who suppress the truth by their wickedness, 19since what may be known about God is plain to them, because God has made it plain to them. 20For since the creation of the world God's invisible qualities—his eternal power and divine nature—have been clearly seen, being understood from what has been made, so that men are without excuse.

And it always ticked me off, because a) there is simply no objective proof for the claim for in 20, and b) these verses showcase a hateful, unmerciful, and unreasonable sort of god.

So the question above remains - what of those that never heard? I'll share my own present understanding after we've seen some initial thoughts.

In reading your question, I am reminded of the following quote by Annie Dillard. You may have heard it before, but I will repeat it for those who've not heard it.



Personally, I don't think any punishment is levied against those who haven't heard. I think they go on to whatever final reward that is in their culture. In the case of the Eskimo, assuming he's Inuit, he would simply die and decay, as they have no afterlife in which punishment or reward is offered, as far as I know.

I find I cannot accept your conclusions regarding the nature of God. I suppose it would depend on how you view the Bible. Do you view it as the "literal word of God" or "God inspired, but written by Man?"

Personally, I regard the Bible as part "word of God," part "inspired by God, but written by Man," and part political manifesto. Romans 1:18-20 would fall under the latter, as it seems to inspire a sense of dread (rather than awe, as was intended) from the reader, and thus, would compel subordination to the ruling authority, that being the Church. As in, "Well, I'm damned if I do, and damned if I don't, so I might as well go to Church and tithe to avoid the Pit." More people in pews leads to more coin in the coffers. Thus the church gets bigger and bigger.

Of course, I am a cynical person, by nature, so take that with a grain of salt.

In the case of the Eskimo, the mere act of telling someone about Jesus seems to be a more horrific act than assuming everyone knows about God through His "invisible qualities." The act of spreading the word forces the choice between the two accepted paths in Christian doctrine and, essentially, penalizes those who choose poorly. This, to me, is a greater moral crime, as not everyone will accept the offer. I am sure I will get some debate on this point.

An interesting question, to be sure. I look forward to the rest of the thread.

Regards,
WonderGoon

Lol; good verse--but they used it in order to avoid part of your question!


I believe that not just the Bible, but other archaeological evidence from the time period before Christ points to a common understanding that when a person died, their soul "went down"; doesn't matter how much of a good life that they lived, they "went down". Another interesting thing to note...



While this passage isn't word for word, it IS from the OT!

So; this passage answers the question (at least to me anyways), where hell is located--deep down underground. Josephus called hell a "dark, subterranean region below the earth". Now, according to common Jewish thought, the human soul after death would "go down" into the dark subterranean region--and then as it was descending, it would encounter hell's gate. The angels in charge of souls would then escort them farther downwards and eventually, there would be some kind of "fork in the tunnel"; one lead to the left, and the other, to the right. The wicked persons went to what I call "The Land of the Fiery flame" (it was either "hell" or this fiery place that many people called "The Shadowlands" or "The Land of Shadows") while those who lived rightous lives and those who were waiting for the Messiah to come, went to the right--to Abe's bosom.
Concerning the wicked; each person would be assigned a tormentor(s) who would inflict all kinds of punishment upon them.

Concerning Abraham's Bosom, well...I think Josephus said that it looked just like earth only difference being that it was like some kind of "waiting room" where they would just chill and hang out and encourage each other in waiting for the Messiah. Messiah eventually came and scripture states that He "preached to the spirits who were in 'prison'" and took those who believed on Him out of that place.

I know that I kinda went off topic a bit there but I hope that answers your question concerning the folks from OT times...

Now; what about today?

Well, Abraham's Bosom is vacant now; nobody's there! Lol; because Christ took all the saints to heaven to be with Him! In today's time, in the region of hell there is:

1. The Land of the Fiery Flame (a very scary place to be)
2. The Lake of Fire (Josephus says that it's seperate from the Land of the Fiery Flame and that it's reserved for the devil, his angels, and the wicked; how JOSEPHUS knew this...well, I leave that up to you to find out).

(I don't know how he knew either; but I digress).

Today, God demands repentance from all man; all men know, one way or another, that there is a God out there that does exist. THAT is all the proof they need in order to begin "hunting for Jesus" ; and when they begin to search, the Holy Spirit's job is to lead them to the True God Who is nothing like the other so-called gods or goddesses that are out there!

Hope that answers your question.

~

NM,

You would have to go to Paul now, wouldn't you!

I think I started a thread on Luke 16 a few years ago examining the nature of Sheol as Yahshau described it in that passage. I don't know if it's still there but otherwise I'll have to reply in detail at a later time. Sheol being the where Joe recognizes the Canaanites and other cultures along with the Israelites reckoned souls went to after life.

I'll need to read Goons post again to see if I understood it all, however the Inuit belief in neither a heaven nor hell non afterlife sounds much like the broad gate that leads to not damnation, but soul death Yahshua described and fits Three Doors Scripturally.

-Theophilus

I think many of the older posts may have been lost? If so I'll copy the passage from Luke / Lucas I was thinking of here:



This passage may have more relevance in the Question 1 thread so I'll copy it there for reference.

[/quote]

Yup, I've heard that one, and agree whole heartedly for the reasons you mentioned below.



My understanding is close to this. The reason I brought the Romans verse up is because it was actually one that was used to bring me to my present understanding, that being that Christ has been present to or known by all peoples - just under different masks and different names (as it was for myself and my former apprentice, just on a grander scale).

As my previous opinion was that of a medium syncretist (holding that some gods of different pantheons may indeed be the same entity with a different face and mythology tacked on) this wasn't too much of a stretch. Of course, isolating which god (or gods?) in any given pantheon is largely an exercise in guesswork, frustration, and UPG (Unverified Personal Gnosis) playing "find the Christ" would indeed be a royal pain in the butt, especially when we get into several gods sharing the same spirit but not the same identity (as was hinted was the case).

This is one the reasons I insist I am not a Christian.



Well, said conclusions about the nature of YHVH only hold true if the bible is literally true and inerrant. I don't believe it to be. In my personal opinion, the bible is still best used as target practice (no offense to our hosts), with perhaps a few gems of truth and wisdom admit the rough.

My Lord's statement varies however. His statement was that the bible is "about half" true, with the rest being corrupted, altered, or downright fabrication. This elicited a Charlie Brown-eqse "AUUUUUGH" from me, as I really dislike the idea of having to deal with even that much as true (let alone the chore of picking the gold from the crap).



More like to avoid the whole question.



Archeological evidence? I think not. More like anthropological and historical evidence. Further, you are speaking only of the Jewish people here. I'm talking about the rest of the world.



*sighs and shakes head* Hell is not a physical place (none of them).



I'm aware of the concept of Sheol and Abraham's Bosom (the later being a Christian concept never mentioned in the OT to my recollection), and have heard those used as answers to this question before. The problem is, why then the change (an unjust one I may add) in method of judgment? Prior to Christ in your statement people were tortured if wicked and just hung out in a nice place if righteous (but wait! I thought ALL were wicked - Romans 3:9-18), but after Christ everyone gets tortured unless they believe. This is unjust, especially considering the facts of history and the spread of Christianity that prompted this question in the first place.



Heh, as I mentioned the verse was ironically used to further my understanding



The problem is - both with this and the verse you noted - that Judaism and the Tanakh were geographically and historically isolated. The majority of the world, in the situation you describe, never even had a chance to hear of let alone choose YHVH. To condemn or destroy people based on them not having a relationship with you when they never had a chance to even so much as hear of your existence is not just. In fact it's downright evil.

NM,

It occurs to me that Yahweh was content to wait a very long time and to have a covenant relationship with a remnant of humanity that authentically responded to Him rather than to instantly create an universalist earthly utopia for all. From our time reference point waiting roughly 15 billion years since the initiation of time-space with the separating of light from darkness until Adam was equipped with a neshamah roughly 6,000 years ago. From your perspective it probably gets worse as and humanoids prior to this event would also be like animal life possessing a nepesh - soul but unable to relate to Spirit and thus like most of humanity given their physical existence to live as they willed and then to perish returning to dust. That is much as Yahshua indicated of people today who while possessing a neshamah elect not to use it for accept Spirit and ceasing to exist after their earthly life.

NM, not granting each person an eternal afterlife precisely made to their liking apart from Yahweh, while deemed evil in your estimation, is the reality the Torah, Prophets, Psalms and Messiah Yahshua teach. Far from evil or cruel, I find allowing each person to live their lives with free will and a conscience a gift which would not be had not the Creator saw fit to bring our existence into being.

The other question I'm looking into is whether salvation was not possible outside of Moses and Israel. Abraham certainly predated Moses and yet walked with Yahweh among others going back to Adam. Another interesting case even in Moses day being his father-in-law Jethro and at least some of the Midianite people who apparently knew Yahweh before Moses, however I think that this is yet another thread. In his covenant with Abraham, Yahweh's promise of a blessing upon the people of the World was fulfilled in Messiah Yahshua's coming as described in the healing and beneficial message of the renewed covenant. The importance of this makes conveying this message the priority He charged His followers with as perishing souls depend on it.

Respectfully,

-Theophilus

You misunderstand I think. It's my contention that to condemn people (either way) without ever giving them the chance to choose - as history shows is the case with the majority of humanity - is evil. However, from your last paragraph I do see a glimmer of hope.



So then Theo, should your parents decide to kill you upon you reaching say 35 because you have not given them a million dollars, would you also find that far from evil or cruel?



This is the basis of my position in this question Theo - do you think that these people are the only ones that Christ (presuming you consider YHVH and Christ one in the same) ever had any relationship with in the entire history of the world prior to the incarnation?

NM, I think our wires are getting crossed again as your analogy is making little sense to me and is therefore unanswerable.

If I follow your thinking, Our Creator ( / Parent) is asking us for the equivalent of a million dollars from us or be cut down short of a natural life expectancy? If so I think you miss what I see the Scriptures speaking of. Allow me to reverse the question.

Do you blame your parents for not providing you with eternal corporeal life or a million dollars for that matter? Is it cruel or evil to let you live your life as you choose to live it amidst the Creation you entered existence?

Otherwise you seem to be saying that the Creator owes each of us an eternal afterlife that fully meets our desires and expectations and this only under our terms or else He is evil / cruel.


I’ll address your presumption first. I understand Yahweh to exist as a complex unity. Yahshua of Nazareth and the Maternal Spirit being set-apart diminished manifestation of the undiminished Yahweh referred to by Messiah Yahshua as Our Heavenly Father.
I’m not sure that I understand just whom you are asking about being the only ones in history being in relationship with Yahweh?

When I consider the Scriptural account, any pre-Adamic humanoids were ill equipped (lacked a Neshamah needed) to relate to Yahweh, but from Adam’s line on an increasing human population had the ability but apparently many not the inclination to know and relate to Adam for the next 1,000 years. At that point a flood event targeting the region where people descended from Adam dwelled appears to have reduced that number to one family. Their descendants like Adam’s before spread out to other lands which both spread the ability to relate to Yahweh’s Spirit as well as other spirits. I see evidence that some of these descendants went on to become so revered that they became deified and in so doing replaced God in the religions established over the peoples that they ruled over. It appears to me that some awareness of Yahweh existed between the flood event and Abram was called to leave his home. I would cite Job as an example of this.

-Theophilus

What I was basically asking is if you would consider it evil for a parent (YHVH or your parents in the example) to require something that the child produce something unreasonable (knowledge/relationship to YHVH when they had never heard of him, or in the example the million dollars) in order to allow that child continued life (some sort of untormented life after death or, in the example physical life).

This example does not refer to us then but to individuals who never heard of (or in your explanation below, had no capacity to relate to) YHVH through no fault of their own.



No, because they don't have that capability. Had they that capability and they decided to without such from me for no fault of my own and no good reason, then I would indeed blame them.



No.



The Maternal Spirit? Can you elaborate on this please?



I was asking about the people you listed -Abraham, Moses, Jethro, etc (broadly speaking - the proto-Hebrew people) - if you thought they were the only ones who had a relationship with Christ prior to the incarnation.



Very curious. I see you saying a number of things here (please correct if I'm wrong on any):

1) There were likely humans prior to Adam.
2) Adam (and presumable Eve) were endowed with a Neshamah by YHVH.
3) Adam's line and the other humans interbred prior to the flood.
4) The flood was localized, wiping out only Neshamah-humans save Noah and family.
5) Noah's family repeated step 3 above
6) Some Neshamah-humans were consider to be gods by baseline humans

This leads to a number of questions:
Q1) Did YHVH make or arrange the evolution of baseline humans?
- 1a) If so, why did he not endow them with Neshamahs?
- 1b) If yes are you saying that he designed these baseline humans with essentially planned obsolescence?
- 1c) Would this not mean that their only choices were to cease to exist after death or bond with a spirit opposed to/separate from YHVH (thus earning eternal torment)?
- 1d) If yes to 1, 1b, and 1c, is this not then an act of evil?
Q2) Can a Neshamah be passed like a genetic trait from a Neshamah-human/baseline human couple to their hybrid offspring? (you seem to imply the answer is yes)
- 2a) If not, do you hold that only those of Adam's line (Jews?) have a Neshamah?
Q3) Do Neshamah-humans have innate super-powers? (no I'm not being facetious, you seem to my eyes to imply this to some degree in that some of them were deified, but perhaps I misread you due to personal perspective and you meant deified in the fashion of the Roman emperors)
Q4) How could these deified Neshamah-humans replace God in the religions established over the peoples that they ruled over if the baseline humans has no capacity to know YHVH?
Q5) Where did the religions of those baseline humans not exposed to Adam's line come from?
- 5a) Does this account for all non-JudeoChristian religions in your opinion?

This example does not refer to us then but to individuals who never heard of (or in your explanation below, had no capacity to relate to) YHVH through no fault of their own.


Okay, I think I might be seeing your point.


In studying the descriptions in Scripture of the Set-Apart Spirit of Yahweh, it becomes evident that She is described in feminine maternal terms. While I don’t see Yahweh as having a gender in a biological sense, I see Him expressing characteristics of each. Certainly , Yahshua exhibited masculine as is the undiminished Father He said He is one with and a representation of. When I examine the references to Yahweh’s set-apart Spirit, She is consistently described in the feminine form and with feminine / maternal characteristics and as a comforter.


I certain that not even these would’ve referred to their god as Christ. I’m uncertain whether these were the only one’s who did, as I have no basis outside of the Scripture to think otherwise. Is it possible/ While I wouldn’t rule it out, it makes a number of the statements in the Scripture questionable when referring to will be found by a people that don’t know me, a blessing upon the peoples of the earth from Abraham’s line, or the need to spread the beneficial message of Messiah to the ends of the World, if they all already knew Him via different names with in many cases radically different personalities.



1 – humans, possibly, certainly humanoids going back 100,000+ years BCE
2- Correct
3- Very likely so, certainly Cain is described as doing so.
4- Yes, or at least those determined to be so corrupted as to undo Yahweh’s greater plan. I’m inclined to believe that the flood would’ve impacted the local animal life as well and have had a wide ranging effect on any other peoples / humanoids dwelling outside but near the immediate flood zone.
5-True
6- Apparently so or even by their own later descendants.


A1) It would seem so
A1a) No or at least not an active / developed one.
A1b) possibly or with the awareness that in time the line would merge or reach a new level
A1c) If not or present or active, I’d say the limitation precludes an eternal existence
A1d) No, I don’t think it is.
A2) I’m not certain as to the means of passing this on. I’d certainly expect that this would be passed on from parent to child, but I’m questioning whether it is a physical / genetic characteristic.
A2a) I’d expect that Jewish kids have a neshamah, as I would most if not all of humanity.
A3) I’m not sure what super-power’s you’re thinking of? The ability to make moral discernment and relate our souls eternally with Spirit would I suppose be a super ability. I’m presuming in the manner of Roman Emperors or forms of Ancestor worship. Think of human Romulus and Remus to Romans.
A4) I’m thinking in the manner the early Pharaohs and their clans conquered and ruled over the natives or neighbours.
A5) I’d expect different sources for different peoples. I see some signs of evolution in people’s belief systems globally. That is primal spirits / animism, to more refined pantheonic systems etc which may indicate a shift in ability to relate Spiritually.
A5a) This is a question I'm much intersted as well. More on this in time I think.

Respectfully,

-Theophilus

Ah I see - basically you're likening the holy spirit as having stereotypically feminine characteristics.



Certainly not, since Christ (Kristos) is simply Greek meaning "anointed one".



Perhaps this is because those scriptures were written by a Hebrew author, from a Hebrew perspective?



Think about this a moment. Even in the OT one's fate in the afterlife is based on merit - one's deeds, good or ill. This is true in virtually every pagan religion to some extent as well. Perhaps it is the case that the crucifixion is not so much a method of enabling individuals to relate to YHVH, or the renewal/expansion of a covenant, but rather the creation of something new - freedom from the necessity of merit (basically enabling the individual to take a mulligan after a fashion). Jesus's message is then not so much a matter of relationship (which will come in time if the right choice is made - when the student is ready the teacher will appear) or the law (merit), but truly one of mercy.



How could they undo YHVH's plan??? That's simply illogical.



So why didn't he give baseline humans Neshamahs? What is the point - or justice - of having generations of sentient beings born only for them to fade to dust when they die? What kind of parent would want that?



So basically a kind of spiritual evolution? This would conform to my own suspicions regarding the human condition.



Why?



I would suspect that it's a spiritual characteristic - I was just asking in order to determine your understanding of it. From what I've seen a child's spirit develops as a portion of it's mother's - the two really can't be differentiated easily until about the third month give or take. By that time it has enough resonance to be distinctly a separate being (under observed conditions that is).



The problem is, this would presume that every living person on the Earth (or the majority) was related to the Adamic/Jewish line - and we know this is not the case.



Ah I see what you mean. By super powers I meant healing, superior strength, walking on water, etc - whatever kind of showy special effects that would give people the idea that the individual with said ability was a god.



But how could baseline humans have a YHVH based religion in the first place if they had no capability to relate to him?



The difference between animistic and polytheistic religions is really only one of systematization and hierarchy. Functionally and in an explanatory stance there is no real difference, and thus as such the change between the two - presuming they are not operating hand in hand as is often the case - is not so much one of evolution (movement toward a higher form) but adaptation to changes in cultural environment.

Interesting study recently undertaken in Australia which may of interest to NM relating to this quote:




http://www.brisbanetimes.com.au/national/meet-ychromosomal-adam-the-big-daddy-we-all-came-from-20091203-k8uv.html

I don't doubt that, as I'm familiar with the DNA research that lead to the discovery of mitochondrial "Eve". However, please note that -

A) These studies clearly trace human origins back to southeast Africa and the people alive at that time would have had little in common phenotypically or genotypically with the modern Semetic peoples.

B)''He wasn't the only guy alive at that time but he was the lucky one who left his Y chromosome lineages down to the present day.'' - meaning there were other chromosomal lineages that did not survive the population bottleneck that likely resulted from Toba's eruption. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lake_Toba

Adam does not indicate Jewish line, although "seed of the woman" comes through the Jewish lineage....just wanted to point that out from your prior point.

Thing is, that's a religious/cultural statement - it has nothing to do with genetics.

Really?

I dont think Secular Jews would agree with you there. To obtain Aliya one must prove one is Jewish. How do you think this is established by a Secular Israeli Government?

Secular Jews still hold the same culture do they not? Though I don't know what Aliya is or have much knowledge of the Israeli government, I'm fairly sure that in a purely genetic sense the genes that make one ethnically Jewish could be passed from either parent.

Most Jews, particularly in Israel do not keep Jewish culture. In fact the New Age is very well and alive amongst the young Jewish demographic. However my point was that there is a benchmark by which someone is deemed Jewish in order for them to make Aliya for example. If one wants to make Aliya (return to Israel - make Israel their homeland) then they must prove their Jewishness and this is regardless of spiritual belief. Messianic Jews for example are now without prejudice when applying for Aliya, yet for someone to convert to Judaism from Christiantiy they must denounce Yeshua.

What then is the basis for them considering the Jewish lineage to be matrilinial? (presuming that's what you originally meant).

Thank you for the info on Aliya btw.

If a person has either parent or as far back to any grandparent that is Jewish, they may apply for Aliya.

Its actually fascinating to me this subject of one's Jewishness. Many, many people apply for Aliya and there are many tears in the various offices where interviews are conducted etc. and where people find out if they have been granted this status. From the (was) lost (recently re-connected) tribe in India to the Ethiopian Jews, the forgotten Jews of Far East Russia to Chinese Jews, how does one prove their Jewishness. The Jerusalem Post recently published an article on this very dilema. The general consensus is that a Jew is someone who has descended from Abraham, Isaac and Jacob - and that is the official secular answer. Do some research, its quite interesting.

Chinese Jews?????



See I would count that as a cultural (but not religious) trait. Since Abraham and Isaac can exactly be objectively proved (there might be a case for Jacob) it's a matter of cultural belief that they are descended from these figures.

I personally don't get what the big deal it is to be Jewish, or the obsession some Christians (not saying you Anita, but thinking of others I've ran into) have with all things Jewish. I mean, what's the big deal about an ethnicity?

Too true. As someone that has now mingled in Messianic congregations and with Messianics for a few years now, I have seen quite a few Jewish wannabee Gentile Christians. There is a saying that to find the gentiles in a MJ congregation, look for the most Jewish "looking" person - usually the ones wearing and carrying all things Judaica

The Jewish believers have an important role and the Gentiles have an equaly important role in Messiah. The two are equal. God made me gentile and knew what He was doing when He did it. Whilst I have a heart for Jewish people and an interest in the Jewish roots of the faith, it would be really pathetic to try and run away from who I have been created to be to try and be someone else entirely

But is the Jewish aspect really the roots of the faith, or simply one aspect of it? I mean if "God has ALWAYS had GRACE & MERCY toward those who would seek His face and His ways" - even pagan folks that never heard of anything remotely like YHVH, then it would stand to reason that Judaism is basically only one expression of God's revelation, yes?

To clarify, imagine a world map. Imagine that the extent of the knowledge of the faith/revelation of God is shown as a red circle on this map.

In the bible and JudeoChristian doctrine the faith/revelation would appear as a red circle that covers approximately the western side of the Middle East, from modern Turkey to Egypt, east to say modern Iraq, centered on modern Israel. Tracking through time this circle would remain basically the same from pre-Abrahamic times to about 100 AD. It would then spread throughout Europe, and later with European colonialism throughout the world.

If your statement that I quoted above is true however, then we have to by definition by looking at a very different scenario. Essentially the entire world map would be covered by that red circle from the beginning of modern human existence (with the possible exception of uninhabited areas). This would basically mean that Gentiles - who were meant to be Gentiles by your statement ("God made me gentile and knew what He was doing when He did it") - would by definition have to have some means of relating to or understanding God. And since history shows that these people didn't have any knowledge or understanding of YHVH in the Hebrew sense of the deity we have to look at what the Gentile peoples did have. And that would be the pagan religions.

Sure...indeed..and as I said consider the Maggi and their understanding and acknowledgement of Messiah from a far off distance. They knew who He was.

Naturally if one like myself starts to study "the Jewish roots of the faith", they soon realise it only goes so far. However, it has still been valuable in my own personal relationship with God to study the feasts for example and the Hebraic perspective, not to mention meeting amazing Jewish believers and hearing their awesome testimonies - some from orthodox backgrounds meeting Yeshua and now feeling complete through Messiah.

I believe there had to be a people by which God would bring the Messiah through. This dosnt make the Gentile any less important. Shades has spoken much more concisely on this subject on ExWitch.