Part Four: The Consequences: Rejecting God’s Gift of Salvation Has Eternal Ramifications

The decision to accept or reject Jesus Christ in this life is an eternal decision (Heb. 9:27). Once someone dies, there is no second chance. They will be forever separated from God who loves them and created them (2 Thess. 1:9); barred permanently from the eternal new heaven and earth promised God’s people (Rev. 21: 1-5)

As we saw in previous blogs, God does not want anyone to enter a Christless eternity. However, He warns that people can reject His offer of salvation only for so long. They can reach a point where they step over the line, where they are alive physically but dead spiritually. Tragically, some people harden themselves to God’s gift of salvation to the point where they seem unable to respond (e.g., 2 Chron. 36: 15-16; Jer. 15:1; Matt. 13: 13-15). As C. S. Lewis put it in his book The Great Divorce, “Their fists are clenched, their teeth are clenched, their eyes fast shut. First they will not, in the end they cannot, open their hands for gifts. . . . Any man may choose eternal death.”

Think about this a moment. Can you imagine anything worse than being eternally separated from God—spending eternity away from the love, peace, joy, and bliss of heaven? No calamity is more disastrous than rejecting forever the opportunity to live forever in an evil-free, pain-free, sorrow-free, best of all possible worlds where all past mistakes and sins will be forgiven.

Let me stress this again. God does not send anyone to Hell. People choose Hell over heaven by willfully rejecting His offer of salvation through Jesus Christ. Jesus said that God did not send Him into the world to condemn it, but to save it. But then He added this somber warning; People who do not believe in Him already “stands condemned.” Why? Because they chose to reject Jesus Christ (John 3: 17-18. Also see Eph. 4: 17-19; 2 Thess. 2:10-11).

Let me add this. Just “believing” God exists does not guarantee salvation. Even demons believe God exists (James 2: 19) and are obviously unsaved.  The Bible unequivocally teaches that salvation is available nowhere else except through Jesus Christ ( Acts 4:12; John 14:6).  Since Jesus is one in essence with God the Father, rejecting the Son is equivalent to rejecting the Father; a willful rejection of Jesus is a deliberate rejection of God. People enter a Christless eternity by slapping away God’s extended hand of forgiveness, love, and eternal fellowship through Jesus Christ. Such a decision results in eternal separation from God in Hell. ©

Next week we’ll look at the “choice”: Heaven or Hell.

Part Three: The Warning:  Everyone Has the Opportunity to Meet God—Including Those Who Reject Him 

The Bible is unambiguous that the eternal destiny of every human being depends on whether or not they believe in the one true and living God. Moreover, the only religion whose deity can be demonstrated to be this true God is the God revealed in the Bible.

But what about people who never had the opportunity to meet God revealed in Scripture? Will they go to Hell? I have answered this question in detail elsewhere, but let me make a few comments relevant to this study. (see Defending Your Faith; Reliable Answers for a New Generation of Spiritual Seekers)

The Bible reveals that people without access to God’s revelation in Scripture can encounter Him in and through creation (e.g., Ps. 19:1-4; Rom. 1:19-20). This “general revelation” is available to every human being who ever lived. It can introduce any spiritual seeker to the one real God and prompt them to seek fuller revelation. We can trust that God will deal fairly and justly with people who sincerely respond to God’s self-disclosure in nature.

But what about people who fail to respond to general revelation in nature? The Apostle Paul answers: They “are without excuse.”  Why? Because they willfully “suppress” God’s self-disclosure in creation. (Rom. 1: 18-21). People can’t suppress truth unless they possess it, so those who reject God’s general revelation in nature are without excuse because they do possess knowledge of God. In short, God has revealed enough about His divine nature and attributes in the natural world for people to respond in some manner and hold them accountable if they don’t.

However—and this crucial to understand—general revelation is not salvific; it does not reveal God’s specific plan for salvation. But it does disclose enough insight into God’s divine nature to prompt spiritual seekers to be receptive to Christian witness, where they will meet Jesus Christ—who is “the image of the invisible God.  . . . [in whom] all the fullness of the Deity lives in bodily form” (Col. 1: 15; 2:9). Believing in God, then, is to believe Jesus is the doorway to eternity. Jesus made this claim Himself in John 14:6 and demonstrated it by His resurrection from the dead (Rom. 1:4).

All this is to say is that people have a choice: They can do it God’s way—which is to accept Jesus as their Lord and Savior—or they can reject God’s way and face the consequences. C.S. expresses this well:

“There are only two kinds of people in the end: Those who say to God, ’Thy will be done,’ and those to whom God says, in the end, “Thy will be done.’ All that are in Hell choose it. Without that self-choice there could be no Hell. No soul that seriously and constantly desires joy will ever miss it. Those who seek find. To those who know it is opened” (The Great Divorce). ©

Part Two:  “People Need God Whether They Realize It or Not”

There are two reasons why everyone needs God: The fact of eventual death—juxtaposed with an instinctive craving for eternal life (Eccl. 3:11)—and the meaninglessness of life without God.

The Inevitability of Death and Craving for Eternal Life

No one gets out of this life alive. Even if we live to a “ripe old age,” as philosopher William James put it, “Old age has the last word.” In saying this, James isn’t making a lighthearted comment on the inevitability of death. He wants his readers to see that eventually, people face the fear, reality, and drama of ultimate death. He continues with these sobering words:

“The purely naturalistic look at life, however enthusiastically it may begin, is sure to end in sadness. . . . The old man, sick with an insidious internal disease, may laugh and quaff his wine at first as well as ever, but he knows his fate now, for the doctors have revealed it; and the knowledge knocks the satisfaction out of all these functions. They are partners of death and the worm is their brother, and they turn to a mere flatness.” (The Varieties of Religious Experiences)

It’s well established that the vast majority of people worldwide believe in a deity. Atheism is an anomaly. In the deepest recesses of their hearts, people believe or at least hope that they will somehow outfox the Grim Reaper by moving into another dimension of conscious existence after death. The late theologian and apologist, Edward John Carnell, said it well:

“Something inside cries out against the conclusion that a purpose-seeking man has been hatched by a purposeless universe. The urge may be ill founded; it may have to be disqualified. Yet, there it is: Our heart tells us that there are destinies at stake in this life. We cannot eradicate this voice. Wisdom dictates, therefore, that before one decides whether or not this witness is trustworthy, a thorough investigation be conducted; lest through either oversight or default an everlasting loss in the soul be sustained.”  (A Philosophy of the Christian Religion)

Life Is Meaningless without God

If God does not exist, life ultimately has no meaning or purpose. Even some of the most notorious atheists acknowledge this:  Friedreich Nietzsche “found his atheism unbearable.” Jean-Paul Sartre “complained of the seeming unlivability of his position, declaring that ‘atheism is a cruel and long-range affair.’” (Philosophy of Religion, 2nd ed.)

This same sense of the meaninglessness and hopelessness of life apart from God is just as prevalent in today’s increasingly secularized world. Christian apologist, Dr. Ravi Zacharias, who recently went home to the Lord, drives this point home:

“In my travels across the globe, I have found this scenario [contemplating suicide] to be conspicuous among our youth in universities everywhere as these institutions deliver meaninglessness in large doses. On campus after campus, in culture after culture, I have listened for hours to intellectuals, young and old, who testify to a deep-seated emptiness. No amount of philosophy about a world without God brings hope. After three decades of covering every continent and delivering scores of university lectures, I have seen that this sense of alienation and meaninglessness is the principle malady of young minds. Academic degree after degree has not removed the haunting specter of the pointlessness of existence in a random universe. . . . The momentary euphoria that may initially accompany a proclamation of liberation [from God] soon fades, and one finds oneself in the vise-like grip of despair in a life without ultimate purpose.” (The End of Reason; A Response to the New Atheists)

If atheism is “unbearable,” “a cruel . . . affair,” delivers only “deep-seated emptiness,” and offers only “the haunting specter of the pointlessness of existence,” common sense demands, as Carnell put it, that “a thorough investigation be conducted; lest through either oversight or default an everlasting loss in the soul be sustained.”

The remaining blog posts in this series will highlight what the Bible has to say about the potential consequences of ignoring such “investigation”—and the potential blessings of those who don’t. ©

Part One: What Will Hell Be Like?

Although Jesus spoke more about Hell than Heaven, the Bible does not provide many details concerning what Hell will be like. In the Gospels, Jesus describes Hell in various ways. For example, Jesus describes it as both “eternal fire” (Matt. 25:4) as well as “outer darkness, where there will be weeping and gnashing of teeth” ( 22:13). Jesus adds in Mark that Hell is where the “worm does not die, and the fire is not quenched” (9:48).  Since fire and darkness seem inherently incompatible, many people assume the terms are used metaphorically rather than literally to emphasize the gravity and horrible consequences awaiting those who reject God’s offer of forgiveness and salvation through Jesus Christ.

Even if metaphorical, however, “eternal fire” and “outer darkness” captures the image of suffering in ways far worse than anything we can experience or understand in this life. In this sense, even a metaphorical description of Hell is literal in that it portrays an existence in the worst of all possible worlds. Perhaps the Apostle Paul reveals the literal reality of Hell best when he says it will be “everlasting destruction  . . . shut out from the presence of the Lord” (2 Thess. 1:9). In other words, eternal separation from God and all that is good, lovely, beautiful, and peaceful—prevented from experiencing everlasting life in the best of all possible worlds.

Years ago, I heard what I think is an excellent illustration to imagine what Hell will be like in a  way people can more easily grasp how eternally tragic and dreadful it will be: It said that this life is as close to Hell as a Christian will ever experience—and as close to Heaven as a non-Christian will ever experience.

Think about this. Pain, suffering, evil, sickness, and natural disasters are common in this world. So are murders, rapes, wars, terrorism, crimes, and corrupt evil political leaders and dictators. Likewise, this world is full of broken families and abused, discarded, starving children. Our cities are the haunts of mentally damaged, drug-addicted, homeless people. Can you imagine spending eternity in a world immeasurably worse than this? That’s Hell. That’s where people who reject Jesus Christ’s free gift of salvation into the best of all possible worlds will spend eternity—in the worse of all possible worlds.

The good news is, no one has to spend eternity in Hell. In fact, the Bible teaches that God does not want anyone to go to Hell. Rather His desire if for everyone to be saved (1 Tim. 2:4; 2 Pet. 3:9). Of course, God not wanting anyone to perish is not the same as saying many won’t.  People who reject Christ will (John 3: 18).

This blog introduces my new six-part blog series, where I’ll demonstrate that God doesn’t send people to Hell. People enter a Christless eternity by slapping away God’s extended hand of forgiveness, love, and eternal fellowship through Jesus Christ in “a new heaven and in a new earth (Rev. 21:1). Such a decision results in eternal separation from God in Hell. I’ll end the series with how to avoid it! ©

Part 10:   Why Should the Christian Church Take a Leading Role in Animal Rights?

 It’s been said that the church has often been on the wrong side of culturally sanctioned moral issues, such as condoning slavery and the oppression of women, children, and minorities. Of course, with the passage of time, the church recognized the immorality of slavery as well as the equality of men and women and the rights of children and minorities. But the fact that some Christians have endorsed such behavior demonstrates that, at times, Christians have failed miserably to discern divine principles for godly living. I’m concerned this is also true of our God-given responsibilities to non-human life.

As we’ve seen in the previous blog posts in this series, God did not create animals solely for human consumption, work, and entertainment. A few varieties serve humanity as domestic stock and companions, but the vast majority—millions of species of wild animals—were created to live untamed and free. They are God’s possessions, and He created specific habitats and foods to ensure they survive and prosper. Does this mean God values animals as much as He does people, or they deserve the same ethical considerations as humans? Of course not; such a notion is totally unbiblical. Only people are created in God’s image (Gen. 1:27). We are the crown of creation (Ps. 8:4-8), and God values us far more than animal life (Matt. 10:29-31). But this doesn’t diminish the fact that God values non-human life and desires that they fulfill the purposes for which He created them.

As God’s ordained stewards over creation(e.g., Ps. 8:6-8), my hope is the Church corporately will take more of a leadership role in promoting the humane care of domesticated animals, protecting wild animals, and managing the natural habitats on which wildlife depend to survive. We can do this without compromising human health and well-being. We should do this because the Bible reveals that animals are valuable to God—not just because a few species serve humanity. ©

Next week I’ll begin a new series provisionally titled: “Hell: Does God Send People to Hell or Do They Choose It—and How to Avoid It.”

Part Nine:  If God Loves Animals, Why Did the Old Testament Include Animal Sacrifices?

 Some readers may be wondering about the apparent inconsistency between God’s love for animals and His instructions in the Old Testament to include animal sacrifices in religious activities. This is a legitimate question, so we’ll explore it in this week’s blog post. First, let’s review what we saw in previous blogs in this series.

God created all animal life. They are His possessions. He enjoys them and desires that they live and prosper, and He has created specific habitats and foods to ensure this will happen.  A few varieties of animals serve humanity as domestic stock and companions, but the vast majority was created to live wild and free. As the prophet Isaiah observes, God “fashioned and made the earth, he founded it; he did not create it to be empty, but formed it to be inhabited” (45:18). In short, animals are both dependent upon and loved by God. Therefore, it’s irrefutable that they are of tremendous value to Him.

With this said, we can conclude that animal sacrifices were never pleasing to God in the sense of His desired response from sinful hearts. After King David committed adultery with Bathsheba, he cried out to God for forgiveness and wrote, “You do not delight in sacrifice, or I would bring it; you do not take pleasure in burnt offerings. The sacrifices of God are a broken spirit; a broken and contrite heart, O God, you will not despise” (Ps. 51:16-17; cf. 40:6).

The shedding of innocent blood vividly depicts the gravity of sin and the heartbreaking cost of redemption. In God’s revelatory plan for human salvation, animal sacrifices in the Old Testament are a typology of the ultimate, once-and-for-all sacrifice of Jesus Christ on behalf of rebellious sinners (see Heb. 10:1-14). There is no more powerful or effective way for God to illustrate to the human race the costly sacrifice Jesus made on the cross for the sins of the world (John 3:16-17). But animal sacrifices do not lessen God’s love for animals – which the Bible plainly teaches – and should not distract us from this fact.

Moreover, slaughtering animals for sacrificial purposes was done quickly and humanely; it was no different than butchering animals for human consumption today. Much of the edible portions of sacrificial animals were used for food (see Deut.12:27; 16:5-7; 18:3). And remember, it was Jesus who ended the need for sacrificing animals by becoming the once-and-for-all sacrifice on the Cross (Heb.10:3-14). ©

Next week I’ll conclude this series by looking at the role the Church should take in the animal “rights” movement.

Part Eight: Moral Principles Jesus Taught  That Can Be Applied to Animals

Servanthood

Christians are told numerous times to be like Jesus (Rom. 13:14; Phil. 2:5; Col. 3:10). When He came to Earth, Jesus took on “the very nature of a servant” (Phil. 2:7), and He expects His followers to be servants also (John 13:15-17). As we saw in the previous blog post, God instructed the human race to be His caretakers in nature. It is not a stretch, therefore, to say that just as Jesus loves us and became our Savior that we should not only love other people as Christ does but also to consider the outflow of our servanthood and love for God’s creation to include being protectors of non-human life—as the dominion mandate requires.

Unconditional Love

In the New Testament, a Greek word most used to describe God’s love for people is agape. It’s a love that denotes a willful choice. It’s the love that God bestows on people, not because we deserve it, but because He chooses to love us despite our sin and rebellion. It’s unconditional love. This kind of love involves God doing what is best for us, not necessarily what we desire. In a similar way, as God’s caretakers in creation, we can make stewardship decisions that may not always be in our best interest—but will be in the best interest of threatened and endangered animals and promotes humane treatment for domesticated animals. Thus, we should set aside habitats to ensure the survival of wildlife and, perhaps, be willing to pay a little more to purchase eggs from free-ranging chickens rather than caged chickens.  In other words, we will make choices that advance our stewardship role as protectors – God’s caretakers – of non-human life.

The Golden Rule

God’s desire for human relationships is summarized in a beloved passage Christians call the Golden Rule: “So in everything, do to others what you would have them do to you, for this sums up the Law and the Prophets”  (Matt. 7:12). Although this rule is directed to people, the principle behind it could be applied to all life God created and values. Animals provide numerous services and pleasures for humans. They provide us with food and clothing. We can use them for legitimate medical testing to develop life-saving drugs. They are companions and aids to the disabled and wounded veterans. Wild animals provide tremendous joy and excitement when we walk through wild country. It seems only reasonable and that we do the best we can to provide animals with the attention and care that God provides them.

If we apply just these three ethical principles to our relationship with wild and domesticated animals, we will not only treat these creatures fairly and humanely, but we will also fulfill God’s command to be His stewards in creation. (C)

Next week’s blog post will look at animal sacrifices in the Old Testament. Do they contradict God’s teaching on the humane treatment of domestic animals?

Part Seven: Do Humans Have Moral Responsibilities over Non-Human Life

 According to Ecclesiastes 3:19-20, on a purely physical level, one can argue that people are little different than animals. Humans and land-bound animals were created on day six. We both depend on God’s gracious provisions for food and shelter, and we will all eventually die.  But the Bible also teaches that there are fundamental and distinct differences between humans and animals. Only humans are created in God’s image. As such, we enjoy a unique spiritual connectedness with God that animals don’t have. But with this position comes responsibility. Because we are created in God’s image, we should reflect the same attitude and care toward non-human life that He does. The fact is God instructed the human race—beginning with Adam—to be stewards over the animal kingdom as part of our overall responsibilities as His designated caretakers in creation.

When God instructed Adam to name the animals He had created and brought to him (Gen. 2:19-20), it showed God was giving Adam authority and responsibility for them. This is not unlike when we name our pets, or when zookeepers name the animals under their care. In doing so, we are acknowledging our responsibility to care and watch over them.

This helps us to understand what God meant in Genesis 1:28 when He told Adam and Eve to have “dominion” (KJV) over the Earth’s newly created animal life. Space prevents an analysis of what dominion means when examined within its full biblical context, but most theologians agree that dominion (“rule” in modern translations) means stewardship. (See my book, Should Christians Be Environmentalists?)  It denotes humanity’s caretaker role in creation; it doesn’t give people a license to use animals any way we please. Here’s another way to see this. At the end of the creation week, God looked upon all He had made and pronounced it “very good” (Gen. 1:31). It doesn’t make sense God would then turned around and gave the Earth’s animals to the human race to abuse and exploit.

This brings us to the matter of ethics. Does the Bible provide moral principles by which we can establish realistic and humane “rights” for animals? I believe it does. Since God instructed the human race to be His caretakers over all of nature, including animals, we can be confident Scripture will contain moral principles to direct this responsibility. In particular, since Jesus is the source and substance of New Testament ethics, we should be able to extrapolate His teachings, where applicable, to embrace non-human life. I believe Jesus taught three foundational ethical principles that will guide us as we seek to identify and establish practical, God-honoring rights for animals. This will be the topic of next week’s blog post. ©

Part Six:  Was Jesus Indifferent to the Welfare of Animals?

One of the criticisms hurled at Christianity by radical animal rights advocates is that the Bible is indifferent to the welfare of animals (which we’ve seen is untrue). In particular, critics claim that Jesus showed little concern for animal life. Well-known animal rights advocate Peter Singer is an example. He wrote, “The New Testament is completely lacking in any injunction against cruelty to animals, or any recommendations to consider their interests. Jesus himself showed indifference to the fate of nonhumans when he induced two thousand swine to hurl themselves into the sea.” (Animal Liberation: A New Ethics for Our Treatment of Animals)

 The text does not justify Singer’s allegation. It was not Jesus but the demons who requested entering into the pigs before they plunged into the sea (see Matt. 8:28–32). Allowing this to happen is not the same as condoning it. To claim otherwise is to read meaning into the passage that flies in the face of the actual narrative—as well as the whole Scriptural teachings on Jesus and nonhuman life.

The primary purpose of Jesus’ incarnation was to open the door for humans to become reconciled to God through His sacrificial death on the cross for our sins. Nevertheless, although Jesus and the New Testament authors say little about animal life, when Jesus walked this earth, He demonstrated an appreciation and concern for animals.

Jesus admired the birds of the air and pointed out that God cares for and protects them (Matt. 6:26; Luke 12:6, 24). He told His disciples that not a single sparrow “is forgotten by God” (Luke 12:6). He pointed out that God provides animals their food (Matt. 6:26; Luke 12:24) and is concerned for their welfare (Luke 12:6). Wild animals even accompanied Jesus during His temptation in the wilderness (Mark 1:13). Indeed, it was Jesus who abolished animal sacrifices (more on this in a later blog post).

Moreover, theologically, it’s essential to understand that for Jesus to have shown indifference to nonhuman life would have been impossible!  As the second member of the triune Godhead, Jesus could not be apathetic toward wild and domesticated animals because God is keenly concerned for their welfare and survival. In other words, as the incarnate Son of God, Jesus would have shared the Father’s love and concern for all animal life, wild and domesticated. I believe Jesus would endorse animal rights—assuming it’s done within a biblical moral framework. ©

This brings us another consideration. Do humans have a God-given moral responsibility for the animal kingdom. This is the topic of next week’s blog post.

Part Five:  “Would God Create Millions of Animal Species but Only Care about People?”

The typical attitude many Christians harbor toward animals is primarily utilitarian and pragmatic. They believe God created animals solely as human a resource: food, clothing, labor, experimentation, entertainment, and sport. As a result, animal rights has not been an important issue in the church, and little effort has been exerted to develop a biblical understanding of human/animal relationships—let alone a biblical perspective on God’s attitude toward non-human life.

The Bible teaches that animals are available for human consumption (Genesis 9:3) and other purposes. From a biblical perspective, people are not cruel to humanely raise animals for food, to hunt them to control overpopulation and to use them for necessary medical research. But the Bible also teaches all animal life belongs to God, not humans: “For every animal of the forest is mine, and the cattle on a thousand hills. I know every bird in the mountains and the creatures of the field are mine (Ps. 50:10-22; cf. Ps. 24:1). Nowhere does the Bible condone the abuse and exploitation that the human race has historically inflicted on animals.  God is very much concerned for the wellbeing of the animals He created. A survey of God’s perspective on non-human life will drive this point home.

Psalm 36:6 tells us that God preserves, “both man and beast.” Numerous passages teach that God provides food and shelter so that wild animal can survive, propagate, and fulfill the purpose of their creation. Nowhere is this communicated more explicitly than Job 38 and 39 and Psalm 104. These passages mention specific animals and specific habitats that God prepared for individual varieties of animals. Job also points out that most events in nature take place beyond human habitats and awareness, and yet God observes all that occurs in the lives of animals. In a series of rhetorical questions, God asks Job, “Do you know when the mountain goats give birth? Do you watch when the doe bears her fawn? I gave [the wild donkey] the wasteland as his home . . . . Does the eagle soar at your command and build his nest on high? (Job 39:1, 6, 27). The self-evident answer to these questions is that only God is present to observe these events.

There are examples in the Old Testament of God instructing the Israelites to care for animals humanely. Proverbs 12:10 says, “a righteous man cares for the needs of his animals.” Jewish law includes provisions for the humane treatment of domesticated animals, including an enemy’s livestock (Ex. 23:4-5). On the Sabbath day, God instructed the Jews to allow their work animals to rest (Ex. 23:12), and not to “muzzle an ox while it is treading out the grain” (Deut. 25:4). Even wild animals were included in God’s instructions. He told the Israelites every seven years not to sow or harvest their crops, vineyards, and olive groves so that poor people and wild animals may eat what they leave (Exod. 23:10-11; Lev. 25:1-7). In short, God loves and cares for animals independently—but not equal to—his love and care for the human family.  ©

How about Jesus? Did He show concern for wild and domestic animals? Would He support animal rights? This is the topic of next week’s blog post.