Quote:
Originally Posted by BaptistInCrisis  Rich, agreed. But are we right to conclude that the "bush man" stands guilty before God on account of sin even though he has never heard the word of God? This is one of the arguments that atheists love to throw in our face. "How could your God send a person to hell who never heard of Him?" The answer I have always given to the question sounds something like this, "All are guilty before God because all are born in sin. Ethnicity, I.Q. or exposure (or lack thereof) to religious education does not increase or decrease guilt. All are guilty." Explaining the "good news" aspect of the gospel is much harder to these type of folks because they are usually so angry over the first part of their question. |
Oh, I just missed this.
Yes, of course the "bush man" is guilty. God has clearly revealed Himself to him in the things created, even His invisible attributes and power. The man is without excuse.
My only point was that he's not held responsible for breaches of specific Mosaic statutes. All of the statutes were outworkings of the Ten Commandments and the whole Law can be summed up in the command to Love God and to Love Neighbor - not merely generally but perfectly.
I didn't mean to distract with the parapet example but people do get too focused on the specific statutes and think that people haven't sinned unless you can find the statute that was wantonly violated.