Are Christians permitted to believe God will provide a Postmortem Opportunity to the Unevangelized?

[Alfred Persson]

Regarding Postmortem Opportunity, I make two claims. The first is that Christians are permitted to believe that God will provide a Postmortem Opportunity to the unevangelized. The language of permission, here, has two senses: (1) epistemological—there is nothing epistemically substandard or irrational about embracing the theory of Postmortem Opportunity—and (2) theological—there is nothing heretical or contrary to the clear teaching of Scripture about Postmortem Opportunity. My second claim is that, for synergists at least, the theory of Postmortem Opportunity is better than other answers to the question of the destiny of the unevangelized.-



James Beilby (PhD, Marquette University) is professor of systematic and philosophical theology at Bethel University in St. Paul, Minnesota. He is the author of Thinking About Christian Apologetics and Epistemology as Theology, the editor of Naturalism Defeated?, and the coeditor of numerous volumes, including The Nature of the Atonement, Divine Foreknowledge, The Historical Jesus, and Justification. His written work has appeared in publications such as Faith and Philosophy, Philosophia Christi, Religious Studies, and Journal of the Evangelical Theological Society.

Beilby, James. Postmortem Opportunity: A Biblical and Theological Assessment of Salvation After Death (p. I). InterVarsity Press. Kindle Edition.


If you answer "yes", join me on this thread to discuss the issue:

Post Mortem Opportunity for Salvation

By calling Abraham "Father" the rich man proves he is not irredeemably wicked. The Rich Man is clearly sorrowful. He has Christian like concern for his family, that they not end up like he. Moreover, the redeemed in heaven want to comfort the Rich Man (Lk. 16:26), but that would be out of place...

christianforums.net

 

[Who Me]

Except Paul says no as in 2cor
6 As God’s fellow workers we urge you not to receive God’s grace in vain. 2 For he says,

‘In the time of my favour I heard you,
and in the day of salvation I helped you.’

I tell you, now is the time of God’s favour, now is the day of salvation.

And in hebrews 9,. 27 Just as people are destined to die once, and after that to face judgment, 28 so Christ was sacrificed once to take away the sins of many; and he will appear a second time, not to bear sin, but to bring salvation to those who are waiting for him.

There is no 2nd chance.

 

[Alfred Persson]

Except Paul says no as in 2cor
6 As God’s fellow workers we urge you not to receive God’s grace in vain. 2 For he says,

‘In the time of my favour I heard you,
and in the day of salvation I helped you.’

I tell you, now is the time of God’s favour, now is the day of salvation.

And in hebrews 9,. 27 Just as people are destined to die once, and after that to face judgment, 28 so Christ was sacrificed once to take away the sins of many; and he will appear a second time, not to bear sin, but to bring salvation to those who are waiting for him.

There is no 2nd chance.

"Now" was in the first century. Aren't you a bit late?

You interpret "now" as when people are alive. Why couldn't "now" be when people die, never having had a chance, born in a country where Islam only was the religion? Couldn't "now" be after you die, as it is appointed for everyone, and after this God Judges after you learn the gospel, repent and then eagerly wait for Christ's second appearing, apart from sin, for salvation?

 

[Who Me]

"Now" was in the first century. Aren't you a bit late?

You interpret "now" as when people are alive. Why couldn't "now" be when people die, never having had a chance, born in a country where Islam only was the religion? Couldn't "now" be after you die, as it is appointed for everyone, and after this God Judges after you learn the gospel, repent and then eagerly wait for Christ's second appearing, apart from sin, for salvation?

Paul was addressing people who were alive. The bible still speaks to people who are alive, so in that way now is always now while you the reader are alive.

 

[Alfred Persson]

Paul was addressing people who were alive. The bible still speaks to people who are alive, so in that way now is always now while you the reader are alive.

My point exactly. Paul was addressing the Corinthians alive about 50 AD. "Now" was a long time ago, neither Paul or the Corinthians he wrote to, are alive anymore.

Just like the dead, you weren't alive when Paul wrote. So why should you get a second chance, but the dead denied one?

You say it doesn't apply to anyone not alive. When Paul wrote, that included you.

Paul didn't write to you, your name isn't in the letter.

So why should God give you a second chance, you missed it. Almost 2,000 years too late.

You should have been alive then, but you weren't.

What makes you deserving of a second chance?

 

[Who Me]

What makes you deserving of a second chance?

Paul wrote to those alive then and to those a.ive when they read the bible.
No one gets a second chance, but everyone gets a chance durring their life.

 

[Alfred Persson]

Paul wrote to those alive then and to those a.ive when they read the bible.
No one gets a second chance, but everyone gets a chance during their life.

Paul wrote to those alive THEN, not you or me.

God is giving us a second chance, because we weren't alive then.

So why wouldn't God give the dead get a second chance also? Many of them weren't alive then either.

Many died before Paul wrote. Or during the first few centuries before Christianity was known in their country.

Why should God give us a second chance, and not them?

It is written:
For there is no partiality with God. (Rom. 2:11 NKJ)

But if God gives us a second chance, and not those who died before Christ, or before Christianity was known to them, then He is partial and the Bible would be wrong. THEREFORE, as God is not partial He would give the dead a second chance also.

Isn't that logical?

 

[Ezekiel]

The early church believes this and so does Jesus.

Revelations 3
12 Him that overcometh will I make a pillar in the temple of my God, and he shall go no more out: and I will write upon him the name of my God, and the name of the city of my God, which is new Jerusalem, which cometh down out of heaven from my God: and I will write upon him my new name.

The early church

John 9
1 And as Jesus passed by, he saw a man which was blind from his birth.
2 And his disciples asked him, saying, Master, who did sin, this man, or his parents, that he was born blind?
3 Jesus answered, Neither hath this man sinned, nor his parents: but that the works of God should be made manifest in him.
4 I must work the works of him that sent me, while it is day: the night cometh, when no man can work.

Others are sent

1 John 4
1 Beloved, believe not every spirit, but try the spirits whether they are of God: because many false prophets are gone out into the world.
2 Hereby know ye the Spirit of God: Every spirit that confesseth that Jesus Christ is come in the flesh is of God:

Paul speaks of it

1 Corinthians 6
6 Dare any of you, having a matter against another, go to law before the unjust, and not before the saints?
2 Do ye not know that the saints shall judge the world? and if the world shall be judged by you, are ye unworthy to judge the smallest matters?
3 Know ye not that we shall judge angels? how much more things that pertain to this life?

The Angels shall lead them to the womb that judgement on them. We should pray for our fathers, mothers, brothers all them before and after us.

 

[Ezekiel]

But Jesus died for all these and became alive again so that if you believe on Him and the Father. That if you are blind now open your eyes and see, if you are cripple stand up and walk, if you are dead in your sins awake and be alive , this is the love of your creator that He took all and you shall be healed in Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit.

 

[Who Me]

Paul wrote to those alive THEN, not you or me

By that reasoning nothing Paul wrote applies to us today.
As that is not true, then your reasoning is faulty.

 

[Alfred Persson]

By that reasoning nothing Paul wrote applies to us today.
As that is not true, then your reasoning is faulty.

No, I pointed out your inconsistent logic. You said the Bible is written to all alive. But, you were NOT alive when it was written, contradicting your premise. Many of the dead were not alive when the gospel was preached, they died before Christ was born. So why do you get a "second chance" and not them?

 

[follower]

Paul wrote to those alive then and to those a.ive when they read the bible.
No one gets a second chance, but everyone gets a chance durring their life.

There has long been opposition to the one true faith, the true gospel, by many false gospels including as if there is salvation for everyone no matter what they do in this life.
Since the Savior Himself shows that those who reject Him do not have life,
and since the other fables associated with "second chance" in the next life are
part and parcel with and of false gospel,
it is actually not even proper for followers of Jesus to receive, fellowship, nor share a meal with anyone bringing such/any false gospel.

 

[Alfred Persson]

There has long been opposition to the one true faith, the true gospel, by many false gospels including as if there is salvation for everyone no matter what they do in this life.
Since the Savior Himself shows that those who reject Him do not have life,
and since the other fables associated with "second chance" in the next life are
part and parcel with and of false gospel,
it is actually not even proper for followers of Jesus to receive, fellowship, nor share a meal with anyone bringing such/any false gospel.

Please do not bear false witness. Nothing I said "is salvation for everyone no matter what they do".

That is universalism, not even close to my position. Try reading it again before you opine.

Here is a sample of my posts on the "Annihilationism" thread:

Annihilationism, do the Wicked Perish?

We've been through this. These passages don't prove your point. I've shown that aionios doesn't mean eternal or forever. Not to mention that Revelation is a book of symbolism. Any passage you post from Revelation would need to be established as literal and figurative. Then the passage you quote...

christianforums.net

************

The wicked (who would rejoice if there were no punishment for their evil works, if death resulted in non-existence or annihilation) should FEAR God, because His wrath can be poured out on both body AND soul.

Gehenna is another name for the lake of fire: "This is the second death"

NKJ Rev. 2:11 "He who has an ear, let him hear what the Spirit says to the churches. He who overcomes shall not be hurt by the second death."'
NKJ Rev. 20:6 Blessed and holy is he who has part in the first resurrection. Over such the second death has no power, but they shall be priests of God and of Christ, and shall reign with Him a thousand years.
NKJ Rev. 20:14 Then Death and Hades were cast into the lake of fire. This is the second death.
NKJ Rev. 21:8 "But the cowardly, unbelieving, abominable, murderers, sexually immoral, sorcerers, idolaters, and all liars shall have their part (3313 μέρος meros) in the lake which burns with fire and brimstone, which is the second death."

The wicked "shall have their part" (3313 μέρος meros) in the lake, their "destiny" determined by God, according to their deeds:

3313 μέρος meros
Meaning: 1) a part 1a) a part due or assigned to one 1b) lot, destiny.-Strong's Concordance

Origin: from an obsolete but more primary form of meiromai (to get as a section or allotment); TDNT - 4:594,585; n n


13 The sea gave up the dead who were in it, and Death and Hades delivered up the dead who were in them. And they were judged, each one according to his works.
14 Then Death and Hades were cast into the lake of fire. This is the second death.
15 And anyone not found written in the Book of Life was cast into the lake of fire. (Rev. 20:13-15 NKJ)

That is, if their names aren't in the Book of life. If it is, these being "judged according to their works, by the things which were written in the books" (among which is the Book of life), are forgiven their misdeeds and enter life.

11 Then I saw a great white throne and Him who sat on it, from whose face the earth and the heaven fled away. And there was found no place for them.
12 And I saw the dead, small and great, standing before God, and books were opened. And another book was opened, which is the Book of Life. And the dead were judged according to their works, by the things which were written in the books. (Rev. 20:11-12 NKJ)

All the rest are cast into the Lake of Fire, the "second death."

The destruction body and soul undergo could be annihilation. The range of ἀπόλλυμι includes destruction that ruins so it no longer is fit for its original purpose, as new wine does to old wineskins:

622 ἀπόλλυμι apollumi
Meaning: 1) to destroy 1a) to put out of the way entirely, abolish, put an end to ruin 1b) render useless 1c) to kill 1d) to declare that one must be put to death 1e) metaph. to devote or give over to eternal misery in hell 1f) to perish, to be lost, ruined, destroyed 2) to destroy 2a) to lose.-Strong's Concordance

"And do not fear those who kill the body but cannot kill the soul. But rather fear Him who is able to destroy (622 ἀπόλλυμι apollumi) both soul and body in hell. (Matt. 10:28 NKJ)

"And no one puts new wine into old wineskins; or else the new wine will burst the wineskins and be spilled, and the wineskins will be ruined (622 ἀπόλλυμι apollumi). (Lk. 5:37 NKJ)

Corroborating this range of meaning, Death and Hades (which are places, not personifications as both are listed with "the sea") are cast into the Lake of fire never to return, they are destroyed. But Satan, False Prophet and Beast are tormented eternally in the same Lake of fire:

Then Death and Hades were cast into the lake of fire. This is the second death. (Rev. 20:14 NKJ)

The devil, who deceived them, was cast into the lake of fire and brimstone where the beast and the false prophet are. And they will be tormented day and night forever and ever. (Rev. 20:10 NKJ)

Last edited: Yesterday at 8:25 PM

 

[Vinny37]

[Are Christians permitted to believe God will provide a Postmortem Opportunity to the Unevangelized?]

Permitted by whom? I don’t believe that God objects, though I don’t believe that it’s the way forward.

With John Sanders (No Other Name) I believe that global opportunity for godly life postmortem has always been existed for all humanity (born & unborn), incidental to evangelism (which Ethnic Israel never believed needful: Naomi disincentivised the Moabite girls from joining Sinai). Nor did the early church believe that ethnic gentiles were all hell-bound: they certainly didn’t bother to evangelise them for about a decade, and many would have died in that time.

But then, I don’t believe that godly life postmortem has ever been accessed through evangelism: God answers each heart’s deepest cry, either to be with him or away from him, eternally (predispositionalism). What evangelism offers is eternal life (a relational quality: Jhn.17:3) in mortal life, and is to some extent pot luck. Christians have the keys to messiah’s kingdom, and can unlock—bring to forgiveness—by offering evangelism, or fail to offer the message of forgiveness/liberty into that kingdom in the here and now. Peter got some stick for opening it Cornelius, and later some stick for closing it down to the Galatians.

Israel's Gone Global: Exploring Biblical Salvation : Steve Hakes : Free Download, Borrow, and Streaming : Internet Archive

An in-depth study on the biblical term, salvation, and its meaning for us.

archive.org

 

[Alfred Persson]

[Are Christians permitted to believe God will provide a Postmortem Opportunity to the Unevangelized?]

Permitted by whom? I don’t believe that God objects, though I don’t believe that it’s the way forward.

With John Sanders (No Other Name) I believe that global opportunity for godly life postmortem has always been existed for all humanity (born & unborn), incidental to evangelism (which Ethnic Israel never believed needful: Naomi disincentivised the Moabite girls from joining Sinai). Nor did the early church believe that ethnic gentiles were all hell-bound: they certainly didn’t bother to evangelise them for about a decade, and many would have died in that time.

But then, I don’t believe that godly life postmortem has ever been accessed through evangelism: God answers each heart’s deepest cry, either to be with him or away from him, eternally (predispositionalism). What evangelism offers is eternal life (a relational quality: Jhn.17:3) in mortal life, and is to some extent pot luck. Christians have the keys to messiah’s kingdom, and can unlock—bring to forgiveness—by offering evangelism, or fail to offer the message of forgiveness/liberty into that kingdom in the here and now. Peter got some stick for opening it Cornelius, and later some stick for closing it down to the Galatians.

Israel's Gone Global: Exploring Biblical Salvation : Steve Hakes : Free Download, Borrow, and Streaming : Internet Archive

An in-depth study on the biblical term, salvation, and its meaning for us.

archive.org

If it were "pot-luck" that implies inefficiency, something I think impossible for the God of Creation. As Paul said, everything made declares God's infinity, in power and intellect.

That's why I am convinced God's plan to save all He can, and judge the rest, is perfect. It maximizes the saved, and does so perfectly.

When all is revealed, we will be beside ourselves in awe, in astonishment how perfectly everything accomplished the Good God intended when He created all things:

Who shall not fear You, O Lord, and glorify Your name? For You alone are holy. For all nations shall come and worship before You, For Your judgments have been manifested." (Rev. 15:4 NKJ)

 

[Vinny37]

[If it were “pot-luck” that implies inefficiency, something I think impossible for the god of Creation. As Paul said, everything made declares God’s infinity, in power and intellect.

That’s why I am convinced God’s plan to save all He can, and judge the rest, is perfect. It maximizes the saved, and does so perfectly.

When all is revealed, we will be beside ourselves in awe, in astonishment how perfectly everything accomplished the Good god intended when He created all things:

Who shall not fear You, O Lord, and glorify Your name? For You alone are holy. For all nations shall come and worship before You, For Your judgments have been manifested.” (Rev. 15:4 NKJ)]

[“pot-luck”…implies inefficiency]. I agree that it would be inefficient if a method of a global imperative of chance-giving. But here I do not speak of a global imperative. I do not predicate postmortem life on a conscious point-in-time decision, which if we’re invoking Rm.10:14 is pretty potluck, postalcode. I base only Christian life (a nonimperative upgrade) on Rm.10:14: σωτηρια/sōtēria (deliverance/‌rescue/‌salvation) has a wide sense of application. The C1 Eskimos and Peruvians simply weren’t in the right postalcode for that upgrade.

But if one predicates a global imperative on a conscious point-in-time decision, then postulating postmortem evangelism (not my baby) is a sensible idea among many: have you read The Great Divorce (C S Lewis)? In the end I think that Lewis accepted that core orientation was in mortal life and decided postmortem life (The Last Battle).

I agree that our theories are but theories, helpful constructs to try to make sense of the data and the scenarios, but that [we will be beside ourselves in awe, in astonishment how perfectly everything accomplished…God intended when he created all things]. On the latter, we could get into defining biological creation (I find Perry Marshall convincing), on determinism, on sovereignty, and on interventionalism. God is of course the ultimate creator (panentheists would say the ultimate creation), but there are more things in heaven and earth, than are dreamt of in our philosophy.

 

[Alfred Persson]

[If it were “pot-luck” that implies inefficiency, something I think impossible for the god of Creation. As Paul said, everything made declares God’s infinity, in power and intellect.

That’s why I am convinced God’s plan to save all He can, and judge the rest, is perfect. It maximizes the saved, and does so perfectly.

When all is revealed, we will be beside ourselves in awe, in astonishment how perfectly everything accomplished the Good god intended when He created all things:

Who shall not fear You, O Lord, and glorify Your name? For You alone are holy. For all nations shall come and worship before You, For Your judgments have been manifested.” (Rev. 15:4 NKJ)]

[“pot-luck”…implies inefficiency]. I agree that it would be inefficient if a method of a global imperative of chance-giving. But here I do not speak of a global imperative. I do not predicate postmortem life on a conscious point-in-time decision, which if we’re invoking Rm.10:14 is pretty potluck, postalcode. I base only Christian life (a nonimperative upgrade) on Rm.10:14: σωτηρια/sōtēria (deliverance/‌rescue/‌salvation) has a wide sense of application. The C1 Eskimos and Peruvians simply weren’t in the right postalcode for that upgrade.

But if one predicates a global imperative on a conscious point-in-time decision, then postulating postmortem evangelism (not my baby) is a sensible idea among many: have you read The Great Divorce (C S Lewis)? In the end I think that Lewis accepted that core orientation was in mortal life and decided postmortem life (The Last Battle).

I agree that our theories are but theories, helpful constructs to try to make sense of the data and the scenarios, but that [we will be beside ourselves in awe, in astonishment how perfectly everything accomplished…God intended when he created all things]. On the latter, we could get into defining biological creation (I find Perry Marshall convincing), on determinism, on sovereignty, and on interventionalism. God is of course the ultimate creator (panentheists would say the ultimate creation), but there are more things in heaven and earth, than are dreamt of in our philosophy.

But scripture demands we not philosophize, that we confine ourselves to the teaching of Christ:

8 Beware lest anyone cheat you through philosophy and empty deceit, according to the tradition of men, according to the basic principles of the world, and not according to Christ.
9 For in Him dwells all the fullness of the Godhead bodily;
10 and you are complete in Him (Col. 2:8-10 NKJ)

I am convinced Scripture teaches postmortem evangelization and salvation, that's the only reason I believe it.

I am amazed how irrational many believers are about this. On some fundamental level they really don't believe God will send into eternal torment everyone who dies without Christ. If they did, you couldn't get them to speak on any other subject. Instead, rarely discuss hell in their everyday life.

In other words, actions speak louder than words. It would appear from their reluctance to preach to family and friends they are going into hellfire at any moment, if they die unexpectedly....

Their actions are more consistent with the belief God will be loving and just, and somehow things won't be as bad as the hellfire and brimstone preachers demand we believe.

Is The Rich Man and Lazarus Story About Hell Prophecy Parable or both | End Time News, Today - Rapture Ready News

34 All these things Jesus spoke to the multitude in parables; and without a parable He did not speak to them, 35 that it might be fulfilled which was spoken by the prophet, saying: "I will open My mouth in parables; I will utter things kept secret from the foundation of the world." (Matt. 13:34-35

endtimenews.net

 

[Vinny37]

[But scripture demands we not philosophize, that we confine ourselves to the teaching of Christ] Thinking through the biblical data, and what texts must mean within their contexts, and marshalling them into a consistent framework and understanding of God (not merely of Christ) and his ways, is good IMO. Scripture is not against philosophy per se, but is against non-biblical systems. “See to it that no one takes you captive through hollow and deceptive philosophy, which depends on human tradition and the elemental spiritual forces of this world rather than on Christ” (NIV: Col.2:8). The “NIV well expresses the fact that Paul was not opposed to (what we would call) ‘philosophy’ in general: literally the word simply means ‘love of wisdom’. But this ‘love of wisdom’, like the facade of a grand house which remains standing when the insides have been demolished, promises much and gives nothing. Hellenistic ‘Judaism’ called itself a ‘philosophy’ on occasion, especially when in contact with the pagan world that thought in terms of competing philosophical schools. Paul, referring to it thus, contemptuously agreed that it should be seen as just another human system.” N T Wright’s Colossians (TNTC), 1986:101). You don’t have biblical texts that say that postmortem evangelism (is)/(will be) done, but must in short philosophise, seek to tease out of Scripture a below-text meaning. That is the way of theology.

[I am convinced Scripture teaches postmortem evangelization and salvation] Fair doos, and you might enjoy https://archive.org/details/noother...de/1up?view=theater&q="postmortem+evangelism". I am unconvinced, though some even within the early church have held the core belief that hearing the Gospel (or being water-baptised) is imperative for postmortem life with God, and posited that position by a certain way of employing Scripture, eg deeming that Jesus preached in hell to a limited few human beings who had refused Noah’s preaching (1 Pt.3:18-20), and postulating that that was paradigmatic for every human being who has never heard Gospel preaching before death. But as Karen Jobes noted (1 Peter (BECNT), 2005), that idea holds basic misunderstandings about Peter’s text and audience, and as Wayne Grudem noted (Systematic Theology, 1994), there’s probably no biblical teaching of Christ having descending into hell.

Similarly some posit at-mortem evangelism for all who knock on death’s door without prior [adequate] evangelism. It’s not that any certain text says this happens, but with postmortem evangelism is based on a must-be-something-like based on the core ideas that God is absolutely and universally fair, and evangelism is a right of all human beings.

I suspect that you rebuke with kid-gloves, Christians who don’t evangelise, as folk believing better than they know. And I tend to agree. Some might even argue that since God will evangelise later if they don’t evangelise now, it’s better to leave evangelism now to the best evangelist later. I’d disagree with such postponement of evangelism on a number of counts.

Evangelism-now is good. I believe that it’s not for all Christians to specialise in, that all should evangelise by lifestyle, and many should through lip, but that the goal is not to gain heaven (or escape hell) postmortem, but to gain Christ in this life, a decided upgrade in human life.

 

[Alfred Persson]

[But scripture demands we not philosophize, that we confine ourselves to the teaching of Christ] Thinking through the biblical data, and what texts must mean within their contexts, and marshalling them into a consistent framework and understanding of God (not merely of Christ) and his ways, is good IMO. Scripture is not against philosophy per se, but is against non-biblical systems. “See to it that no one takes you captive through hollow and deceptive philosophy, which depends on human tradition and the elemental spiritual forces of this world rather than on Christ” (NIV: Col.2:8).

That was my precise point. The metaphysics of the past are simply wrong according to modern scientific observations of the nature of reality and substance. It can be argued science is finally catching up to the Bible's correct views.

I apologize for lacking the time to discuss much more than this with you.

You are well-read and have lots to say on a variety of interesting tangents, but I'm trying to learn Day Trading SPY options to supplement my income, and that must come first. I try to keep my focus here limited to scripture exegesis and simple statements that don't require much depth. Peace brother.