Two men who both lived as though God didn’t exist. They were what I call functional atheists. They may not have said that God doesn't exist but for all intents and purpose He had no relevance in their lives.
Two men who mocked God as He hung before them. “So you’re God? Prove it and then I’ll believe in you.”
Gee how many times have I heard that one?
And then something changed. The spiritual eyes of one of the men was opened (Romans 9:15,16; John 6:44).
Amazing grace that saves one wretch and not another.
“Don’t you fear God?”
The same mouth that just moments before had cursed God, now sought Him out. The same mind that once looked for evidence to deny the existence of God now defended God. Can you imagine? How does that happen? Two atheists on the cross. One moment both are totally self-absorbed. The next moment one of them loses himself in the greatness of his Creator.
How is it that two people can see the same God, consider the same evidence, be exposed to the same love, the same offer of forgiveness, yet only one turns, only one accepts, only one is forgiven.
How is it that two people can have their sins exposed but only one agrees with God’s assessment of his character, while the other calls God a liar, “I’m a good person!” One sees himself in the light of God’s goodness while the other sees himself in comparison to those who are even more wretched. How can such blindness remain? I don’t know.
The two men have chosen completely different ends to their earthly lives. It can be no other way. One chooses to remain separated from God and his wish will be granted - for eternity.
The other sees the hopelessness of his situation and asks the only thing someone in that position can say, “Jesus, remember me . . .” His wish will also be granted - for eternity.
One rejects the forgiveness being offered.
The other accepts and hears, “Today you will be with Me in paradise.”
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
How are Christian morals are objective?
ReplyDelete...and while I'm here, I have another question. Is it moral for a man to steal in order for him to feed his family, if there seems to be no alternative?
"How is it that two people can see the same God, consider the same evidence, be exposed to the same love, the same offer of forgiveness, yet only one turns, only one accepts, only one is forgiven?"
ReplyDeleteAmong other things, studies have shown that a person's desires and expectations can influence his perception of an event. One person's miracle is another person's coincidence.
Mak when it got to that stage guess it was kind of like a lottery,what had he left to lose .Either way he faced his earthly death.
ReplyDeleteIts natural in a situation like that, that many humans will grasp for any hope that can be thought of,even if it dont exist
But in reality its not so simply as only considering Pascals wager unless we want to be selfish gamblers who only consider taking care of ourselves.
Morally we should also consider the efects of the continued promotion of faith in the supernatural also.Because its sure been having its effect on humans since people first started gambling on it.From human sacrifice to abuse and separation of families and cause of heartbreak and witch burnings and suicides,putting Pascals wager aside ,there is certainly NO QUESTIONS is there !! that it DEFINITLY can be harmful.
I dont know the exact answer to what you said about "I don’t know"
But maybe it was he was thinking about bad experiences he had had of the effects of people guessing faiths in the supernatural.
Can you prove he wasnt the son of folks who treated him bad or disowned him,because he never accepted what ever faith they believed?
Was he a robber? ...Could he have ended up stealing through being shunned and excomunicated by family.
Thats the trouble we dont know absolutely all the details do we.