The question is often asked, why does the Bible include four different Gospels? Forming the first books of the New Testament; Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John all tell the story of the life and ministry of Jesus, with many similar details and more than a few differences. The first three are often referred to as the Synoptic Gospels (literally meaning to see together) because of the abundance of parallel details recorded in each one. Some scholars have even become convinced that the first three evangelists must have all copied copiously from an as-yet-undiscovered common source which they have labeled “Q.” The Gospel According to John, agreed almost universally to be the last one to be written, diverges in so many instances from the Synoptics and contains so many unique characteristics that, apparently, either the aged apostle did not know about this “Q” document or he chose not to use it.
In my opinion, I do not believe that similarities in detail and structure of narrative necessitate a common source but rather reflect the recounting of events that were well known and established within the minds of the Gospel writers. Matthew was an eyewitness to most of the account he records (which is why it has always puzzled me that some scholars would think that he needed to read somebody else’s book to know what happened!) while Luke and Mark were both traveling companions of the Apostle Paul (2 Timothy 4:11), who was in close contact with many eyewitnesses to the life of Jesus, with tradition maintaining that Mark was not only present during much of Jesus’ ministry, but was also a protege of the Apostle Peter after the Resurrection. Why would Mark need to consult some now lost, anonymous record of the Lord’s ministry when he doubtlessly had many times heard the reports of Simon Peter himself in rich and vivid detail?
The reason that we have four accounts of the Gospel which are often parallel but at times variant is that they are telling the same story from four different perspectives. The focus of each Gospel is slightly different, the original audience for each one is different, and even the purpose of each account is a little different. The metaphor has been given that one Gospel record would provide us with a beautiful portrait of Jesus Christ, like a two-dimensional painting, filled with color and texture. But when we take all the Gospel accounts together, we have something more like a three-dimensional sculpture showing us a much deeper image bursting to life with vividness.
Matthew, Writer to the Jew
“For I am not ashamed of the gospel, for it is the power of God for salvation to everyone who believes, to the Jew first and also to the Greek.” (Romans 1:16)
As far as chronological order goes, the Gospel came first to the Jews before the Gentiles. It is fitting that the first Gospel to appear in the New Testament would be addressed to a primarily Jewish audience. Matthew’s Gospel bridges the New Testament to the Old as he establishes that Jesus is the long-awaited, promised Jewish Messiah. Matthew is quick to point out that the events he writes about happened to “fulfill what was spoken by the Lord” (e.g., Matt. 1:22). Fulfilled prophecy is a non-negotiable credential of the Messiah and any Gospel to be believed by the Jewish mind must contain it. Matthew opens his book with a genealogy linking Jesus back to Abraham, establishing His identity as a Jew. He also links the Lord to King David, establishing the Lord’s earthly right to reign as King of Israel as a Descendant of the king. Many scholars believe that Matthew originally wrote his Gospel account in Hebrew (as I believe also) because it was a Jewish audience he was primarily addressing.
Mark, Writer to the Romans
If the Jew was rooted in the past as one interested in tradition, the Roman was a man of the present. Stretching across most of the known world, the Empire of Rome ruled today, in the now. Carpe Diem was the philosophy and a strong focus on the present was the mindset of Rome’s citizens. Scattered throughout Mark’s Gospel are words like immediately which denote the fast-pace with which he is unfolding his message. This is the Gospel of action and is consequently the shortest of the four. Additionally, Mark focuses less on Jewish religious politics and makes sure to explain the Hebrew customs that he does mention. No genealogies are given because the Roman audience would not be interested in such details.
Luke, Writer to the Greeks
“It seemed fitting for me as well, having investigated everything carefully from the beginning, to write it out for you in consecutive order, most excellent Theophilus;” (Luke 1:3)
Although Luke specifically addresses his Gospel (as well as the Book of Acts) to what seems to be one person, he clearly had a Greek-minded audience in mind when he wrote it. While the other Gospels often followed themes rather than a chronological order (Matthew would record miracles close together even when they may have taken place at very different times), Luke’s Gospel is more systematic, reflecting the observational skills of a physician and scholar. Luke presents Jesus Christ as the “Son of Man”, belonging not only to Israel but to anyone, Jew or Gentile, who would come to faith in Him. This is the Gospel which gives us insights, few as they may be, into the childhood of the Lord and focuses more on those on the fringe of Jewish society than the other Evangelists.
John, Writer to the Believer
Though the Apostle John explicitly states his purpose for writing his Gospel in John 20:31, that is, so that the reader might believe in Jesus Christ and have eternal life in His name, this last Gospel written seems aimed at giving a more in-depth revelation of exactly who Jesus is. John reveals Jesus as not only the “Son of God”, but as God the Son. John’s is a more spiritual Gospel that goes into areas that the other writers did not divulge in their accounts. By the time the fourth Gospel is set down on paper, Christianity had been around some sixty years or so and had already suffered heretical attacks from many sides. Whether it was the sophistry of the Greeks or the twisted reasoning of the Gnostics, John’s Gospel serves almost as an apologetic refutation of errors that had already begun to invade the infant Church. It is fitting that “the Disciple whom Jesus loved” would be the final voice to vindicate His Master’s Words at the close of the First Century, leaving a foundation of Gospel Truth upon which the Body of Christ could rest firmly before the curtain closed on the Age of the Apostles.
Four Perspectives on One Gospel
Thus the Gospel, though told from four different perspectives, is really one Gospel. It is the “Good News” not only for Israel but for the entire world. Jews and Gentiles, Romans and barbarians, slaves and free people, and men and women all could come to Jesus Christ for Salvation. None would be excluded on any basis other than their own decision to reject the only One sent by God the Father to save sinners. And regardless of a person’s background, there is a Gospel written that speaks directly to them. The sign which Pontius Pilate placed on Jesus’ Cross was written in three languages, to address the three main types of people present at the Crucifixion (John 19:20). This is reflected in the original target audience of each of the first three Gospels: Hebrew (Matthew), Latin (Mark), and Greek (Luke).
” Opening his mouth, Peter said: “I most certainly understand now that God is not one to show partiality, but in every nation the man who fears Him and does what is right is welcome to Him.” (Acts 10:34-35)
To Jesus Christ goes all glory. In service to Him,
[If you do not know the Lord Jesus Christ or you are not certain where you are headed when this life ends, I invite you to read the article “Am I Going To Heaven?“]
Recognizing Our Need
Knowing Where The Food Is Not
“Now when Jacob saw that there was corn in Egypt, Jacob said unto his sons, Why do ye look one upon another?” (Genesis 42:1)
Knowing Where the Food Is
“And [Jacob] said, Behold, I have heard that there is corn in Egypt…” (Genesis 42:2a)
Going To Where the Food Is
“And Joseph’s ten brethren went down to buy corn in Egypt.” (Genesis 42:3)
[This post was originally published October 15, 2010]
All Scripture quotations in this post are taken from the King James Version (KJV) of the Holy Bible
[If you do not know the Lord Jesus Christ or you are not certain where you are headed when this life ends, I invite you to read the article “Am I Going To Heaven?“]
I would like to share an interesting comment I received recently to a post I wrote a few years back called: “What Must We Believe? – 10 Components Of The Gospel Message.” One of the components I mentioned was that “Salvation is Voluntary and Contingent on if we Believe.” Under that heading, I wrote the following:
Salvation is not an automatic provision for anybody. It occurs only if we believe. There are some who teach that you need to do absolutely nothing in order to be saved. There are others who teach that everyone (or almost everyone) will be saved. Neither of these teachings are supported by the Bible.
Granted, our part in the process of Salvation is vastly lesser than God’s part. In fact, He has done EVERYTHING else in order for you to be saved. The ONLY thing that you have to do is believe on Him. But you do have to do that.
Here is the comment that I received:
“You have one major mistake in your outline that is not supported by scripture.
You say,”Salvation is Voluntary (1st mistake, How is it voluntary and dependent on us if it is all of God? Even Nicodemus recognize he could not do what Jesus was saying, Because Salvation is a Spiritual Birth, According to Paul Eph 2 out side of Christ men are dead, Can dead men bring themselves back to life? Was Lazarus coming out of the grave his doings or jesus? Paul also says Men are blind. Can a blind man restore his own sight if He wants to? So How can salvation be voluntary? Aren’t men in the same postion as Nicodemus? Jesus did not Preach you can be saved if you want to. He said ye must be born again. In John 3 he states this twice and give the consequence if one is not born again.”
I suspect that this gentleman’s comment came as a knee-jerk reaction to the idea that anything is required in order to receive Salvation. I suspect this because I myself often have a very similar reaction when people begin to talk about needing to do this or that in order to be saved. But I remember reading something else a while back that I found very disturbing also. It seems that many in the Church have begun to teach that absolutely nothing is required for Salvation, including faith. They contend that since faith and believing are works on our part, then they have no place in the process of Salvation. Yet the Bible teaches otherwise. Jesus Himself, when asked what “works” needed to be done by man to please God, He responded:
“…This is the work of God, that you believe in Him whom He has sent.” (John 6:29)
No other work is required, but we do have to believe. Even so, our ability to believe is actually a gift of God so we can’t even take credit for that! I don’t suggest that this is necessarily the position of the one who wrote the comment, like I said, I think this was a just a reaction to how I chose to word my post. I did, however, feel that it was important enough for me to clarify what I meant and I would like to share my response:
“Perhaps to head this section of the outline with the words, “Salvation is voluntary…”, is a mistake which leaves open wide the door for misunderstanding. My intent in writing this article was to keep the matter as succinct as possible without digressing into an involved theological argument. However, I assure you, that my statement was in no way an endorsement of a works-based Salvation. I wrote under the heading:
“Granted, our part in the process of Salvation is vastly lesser than God’s part. In fact, He has done EVERYTHING else in order for you to be saved. The ONLY thing that you have to do is believe on Him. But you do have to do that.”
This is not to imply a work of Salvation on the part of man, but rather a reception of God’s grace for Salvation. I have given the analogy before of the plight of a beggar. The benefactor decides to give money to the beggar, it is his choice. The benefactor has earned the money he will give, it is his work which provides it, not the beggar’s. The benefactor extends the money in his hand and freely offers it to him. The beggar then…what?…places his hands in his pocket and turns his back on the benefactor while the benefactor tackles him and forces him to take it? No. The beggar reaches out his hand to receive that which is being freely offered to him.
So, who is then responsible for the meal that the beggar will now enjoy with the money? Was it the gift of the benefactor or the reaching out of the beggar which secured it? I maintain that it is entirely the work and graciousness of the benefactor (Christ) without which the beggar (the sinner) would go away hungry. Yet the beggar did have to hold his hand out and take (faith) what was being offered.
I recognize that this whole subject matter is a very theologically complex one that has been parsed ad infinitum and has drawn battle lines in the Church for centuries. I staunchly support the vindication of Salvation Sola Gratia and the refutation of any works-based approach. Yet to hold that faith has no place in Salvation is to deny a crucial component of the Gospel.
You mentioned Ephesians 2, but remember, this is where Paul wrote:
“For by grace you have been saved through faith; and that not of yourselves, it is the gift of God;” (Eph. 2:8, emphasis added)
It is by the Grace of God, it is the gift of God, but it is received through faith (the beggar holding out his hand). Therefore, it is no contradiction for Paul to say it is not “of yourselves” even though you are receiving it through faith. It is God’s work, not ours. Nevertheless, the beggar who refuses to accept what he is given is in no better state than he was before.
Maybe the best illustration from Scripture is found in Romans 10:13-15:
“For “Whoever will call on the name of the Lord will be saved.” How then will they call on Him in whom they have not believed? How will they believe in Him whom they have not heard? And how will they hear without a preacher? How will they preach unless they are sent? Just as it is written, “How beautiful are the feet of those who bring good news of good things!”
Whoever will call on the name of the Lord will be saved (you have to call on His name, i.e., accept Him through faith, right?). But how can you do that except you hear the Gospel (the work that God has done, i.e., Salvation by Grace alone). And how will you hear the Gospel except it is preached by someone whom God has sent (Calvinism, pre-destination, Divine election, and whatever else we wish to label it!). God has done the work, sent the Message, and even chosen to whom it will be preached. All we have to do is hold out our hand and receive it.
Men are blind and a blind man certainly cannot restore his own sight. But what would have happened to the blind man if he did not accept the words of the Lord by faith and go and wash his eyes at the Pool of Siloam (John 9:1-11)? Was it the waters of Siloam that gave him sight? No, it was the touch of Jesus Christ that gave him his vision. But the Lord decided that he was to receive the healing through faith and had he not done so he would have remained blind.
The Bible makes it clear that Salvation will not be forced upon anyone (if you don’t believe me, consider Judas Iscariot). It must be received. Jesus knocks at the door, but we must open it (Rev. 3:20). He simply is not going to break it down. Salvation is not voluntary as in it is our decision for it to happen. But it is received voluntarily and is contingent on whether we accept the Gospel by faith.
“For they that are after the flesh do mind the things of the flesh; but they that are after the Spirit the things of the Spirit.” (Romans 8:5)
Romans 8:5-8 shows us certain distinctions between those who walk after the flesh and those who walk after the Spirit. We saw in Verse 1 that there is no condemnation to those which are in Christ Jesus, and those who are in Christ Jesus were further defined as those who walk not after the flesh, but after the Spirit. Those who walk after the flesh are those who are not in Christ Jesus, that is to say, those who have not trusted in Him for Salvation.
The first thing we see about those who are not in Christ Jesus is that they mind the things of the flesh. The unsaved sinner’s attention, desires, agenda, and motives are wholly and entirely focused on satisying his own urges. To walk after the flesh is to live a lifestyle centered on one’s self and the achievement of one’s own goals with no regard for God or His plan and will. This assessment does not in any way fit the Christian who falls occasionally into sin. Those who are lost, those who walk after the flesh, have no desire to follow God, no unction whatsoever to walk after the Spirit. The true child of God may stray from time to time from his Lord, but the yearning of his heart is to follow after Him.
“Because the carnal mind is enmity against God: for it is not subject to the law of God, neither indeed can be.” (Romans 8:7)
Those who have not come to faith in Christ have absolutely no capacity for the things of God. In fact, the lost sinner despises the Lord Jesus Christ and His Law and Word. The carnal mind is enmity against the Lord; it cannot be convinced, persuaded, or “talked into” understanding the things of God. It amazes me how the same words of healing that bring peace and joy to the believer can anger and embitter the non-believer. A quick look around the Internet at some of the comments found on websites and forums focused on Christian topics reveals a deeply embedded hatred in the soul of many lost sinners toward their Creator. The heart separated from God sees God as their enemy and has no inclination to view Him otherwise. Except the Holy Spirit draws us, none would ever seek to come to Him.
“For the preaching of the cross is to them that perish foolishness; but unto us which are saved it is the power of God.” (1 Corinthians 1:18)
We have the tendency to often look at our efforts to share the Gospel as if we are making a sales pitch, attempting to convince our listeners to “buy our product.” No, we may not do this consciously, but we sometimes think that a person’s willingness to accept the Good News rests upon the quality of our presentation. We must remember that, whenever we are witnessing to a lost sinner, we are preaching to a mind that is at odds with the Lord Jesus and is, by nature, hostile toward the things of God. This does not mean that they can never be reached, but it does mean that it is the Holy Spirit Who must do so. If the Spirit of the Lord is at work in their heart, drawing them toward Jesus, then the words of the Gospel will ring true. But so long as a person continues to harden their heart and resist the Word of God, then they remain at enmity against God and cannot be persuaded otherwise.
To God goes all glory. In service to Him,
A popular comedian appeared on a talk show a few years back and was discussing current events and politics with the show’s host. The conversation turned to matters of religion, Christianity, and ultimately, T.V. evangelists. When asked by the host how he felt about the Christian Faith being preached on Television, the comedian quipped, “I just don’t agree with the whole idea, I mean, what about all of the people who haven’t had a chance to hear their Message? I refuse to believe that a billion people in China are going to Hell just because they don’t have Cable.”
The dilemma over how God will deal with those who have never had a chance to receive Christ because of the fact that they never heard of Him has been a point of speculation throughout the history of the Church. Many skeptics (such as the comedian mentioned above) have also pointed to this question and have used it as an argument against the reality of the Gospel. How can God send someone to Hell who never had the chance to put their faith in Him?, they ask, What about all of those people living in the wilds of Africa, or Australia, or South America who have never even heard about Jesus?
What Concern Is That To Us?
“Peter seeing [John] saith to Jesus, Lord, and what shall this man do? Jesus saith unto him, If I will that he tarry till I come, what is that to thee? follow thou me.” (John 21:21-22)
Before we consider a possible solution to this question, we should understand that the Word of God does not go into great detail concerning how God will handle this, it concerns itself with our fate and destiny, that is, those who have heard the Gospel and have heard about Jesus Christ. The Bible does not spend a lot of time dealing with the what ifs? and speculations that man has come up with. A theme woven throughout Scripture is that God is good, God is fair, and God is just. We are called to trust in the Lord Jesus Christ and to trust that He will deal with all people in a fair and appropriate manner. As He told Peter when he asked of Him what would happen to John, “What is that to thee? Follow Me.” The important question for each of us is not What will God do about the man who has never heard about Jesus?, the important question for each of us is What have I done in response to the fact that I HAVE heard of Jesus?
An Answer That Might Seem Harsh
That being said, I would like to offer up what I believe the Word of God does have to say about the matter; but I will warn you ahead of time that you might not like the answer. I personally have not heard a whole lot of Christian leaders address this issue in public, but a preacher under whom I studied was asked in a classroom setting by prospective ministers about this very thing. He drew in a deep breath and, knowing that this can be a touchy topic, even among Christians, said, “Well, it’s hard to give a short answer without a lot of explanation…but if I had to give a short answer, I would say that these people are lost, even those who have never heard the Gospel.” The gasps amongst our group were audible and the tension was palpable. How could a gentle, God-loving pastor say such a thing! Surely he was mistaken. He had wanted to steer away from the subject and keep on the topic at hand, avoiding the lengthy discussion and perhaps debate which would inevitably follow, but even saying what he did, all attention was off the original topic and planted firmly on this peripheral matter. The truth is that when this question is raised, a lot of people who attempt to address it will give some sort of explanation that basically amounts to God giving a free pass to those who have never heard. Entire heretical denominations calling themselves Christian have arisen based on no other principle than the idea that everybody is OK in the eyes of God and everybody is going to make it to Heaven. Concepts like Hell, eternal damnation, and everlasting conscious separation from God are so distasteful and frightening to some people that they would rather create their own Gospel rather than accept them. The idea of God condemning a “noble, innocent” primitive person, disconnected from the rest of the world and ignorant of what the Bible teaches, is appalling to many people and they would rather believe that God will just pat them on the head, tell them they did the best they could, and sneak them in through the back door of Heaven. But Scripture certainly does not seem to support such a position. Let us take a look at what the Bible tells us:
Perishing Without The Law
“For as many as have sinned without law shall also perish without law: and as many as have sinned in the law shall be judged by the law;” (Romans 2:12)
According to Romans 2:12, there are two kinds of sinners: Those condemned apart from the Law, and those condemned in it. What does that mean exactly? It means that whether or not a person had the revelation of the Law of Moses or not, he was a sinner. Whether the person was an Israelite living under the Mosaic system, or a pagan living under his own moral or ethical system, man is a sinner. Romans 2:15 goes on to explain that those to whom the Law of Moses was never given, that is, those who are wholly ignorant of it, are still guilty of sin and their very consciences bear witness to this fact. They may not have the revelation of God’s specific Law as handed down to Moses on Mt. Sinai, but they are guilty of violating the moral and ethical expectations planted in their own hearts. Those living under the Law of Moses are sinners because they failed to keep that Law; those not living under the Law of Moses are sinners because they have failed to keep the Law written in their heart. Either way, all men have failed to live up to the Light that they have been given. We have all failed to abide by whatever sense of right and wrong we have been given, whether it be the written revelation of the Lord as recorded in His Word, or the sense of right and wrong which He has placed inside each one of us.
“He that believeth on him is not condemned: but HE THAT BELIEVETH NOT IS CONDEMNED ALREADY, because he hath not believed in the name of the only begotten Son of God.” (John 3:18, emphasis added)
Ultimately, people do not go to Hell because they have rejected Christ; people go to Hell because they are sinners and they die in their sins. Those who do not believe on the Lord Jesus Christ (including those who have never heard) stand condemned already, they do not become condemned because of their rejection of the Gospel. Whether living under the Law of Moses or not, we all stand condemned apart from Christ. A person does not drown in the ocean because they were not thrown a life-line, they drown because they sink in the water and cannot breathe! Indeed, a life-line would have certainly saved them from drowning, but that is not really the cause of their drowning.
So How Is It Fair For God To Deny Some People The Chance To Be Saved?
All right, so I realize that the analogy of a person drowning in the ocean is not completely fitting to the topic at hand. After all, we would expect an omnipotent God to at least offer a life-line to every one of us before we do “drown in the ocean”, wouldn’t we? At least then we would agree that everyone has had a fair chance to either receive or reject the Gospel. I believe that the solution to this question is found in the fact that, not only is God certainly omnipotent and able to offer Salvation to every single person, He is omniscient and aware of who will receive it and who will not. God is not limited in His knowledge; He does not need to wait and see if a particular individual will accept Christ or not. He knows ahead of time what decision each of us will make. If God were as limited in His knowledge as we are, then His justice might be questioned concerning those who were never given the chance. But since God already knows (and has known since the foundation of the world) whether or not every single person to ever live upon the face of the Earth would or would not accept Christ, His justice remains indisputable. God knows the hearts and minds of every man and it is not necessary for the Gospel to actually be presented to us in order for Him to know what our response to it would be.
God Has Set “The Bounds Of Our Habitation”
“And [God] hath made of one blood all nations of men for to dwell on all the face of the earth, and hath determined the times before appointed, and the bounds of their habitation;” (Acts 17:26)
If we truly believe that God is in control of all things, then we must realize that the time and place into which each of us is born is no accident. God has not arbitrarily determined where and when each person would live, but has appointed a time and place to every man. He has set the bounds of our habitation for His own purposes. I do not believe that God would have caused a person to be born in 8th Century South America if that person would have ever been willing to receive the Gospel. Skeptics have painted the picture of a poor, noble, and good native living in a far off land beyond the reach of missionaries who will be condemned to Hell because he never had the chance to hear about Jesus. But this is not the case. God knew every one of us before He ever even made us and has placed each of us who would ultimately accept Christ in the historical and geographical context wherein we live so that we would be presented with the Gospel and introduced to Christ.
There are, in fact, many instances in Scripture where God reached His hand across boundaries that would otherwise prohibit a person to being exposed to the Gospel, simply because that person did have a ready-heart. They had responded to all of the Light that God had given them thus far, and the Lord was willing to give them more. God sent the Roman Centurion Cornelius to Peter to learn of Christ because he was a “devout man who feared God” (Acts 10:1-2). The Lord sent Philip to the Ethiopian Treasurer because he was a man who sincerely desired to understand the Word of God and have someone explain it to him (Acts 8:30-31). God caused the Apostle Paul and Silas to spend a night in a jail in Philippi for no other reason than the fact that the jailer working there had a ready-heart to say unto them, “Sirs, what must I do to be saved?” (Acts 16:30). Time and space are not obstacles to God getting the Gospel through to people, the hardness of man’s heart is. If there were a single, willing person living in the most remote section of the world who would come to Christ if only he knew of Him, we can be certain that God would move Heaven and Earth to make it happen.
If They Be Not Lost, Then Why Do We Look For Them?
In the discussion I mentioned above about the pastor giving us his viewpoint in the classroom, he finally concluded his remarks by what was the most crucial reason, in his opinion, for believing the way he did: “If the people who have never heard the Gospel are not lost, then what is the point in going to them?” When we look at all of the missionaries throughout Church history who sacrificed so much to travel at great expense and in great peril to the uttermost parts of the Earth so that they might preach Christ to ears who had never heard of Him, to think that their efforts were in vain is a tragedy of the highest order. For not only would their efforts have been unnecessary if those ignorant of the Gospel are not truly perishing, their efforts would have actually been damaging to the very ones they sought to help! If ignorance alleviates responsibility, then woe to the one who teaches! Would it not be in everyone’s best interest for missionaries to stay home if their prospective converts are Heaven-bound already?
God Is Fair
I recognize that there are other viewpoints and opinions about this topic and that it is certainly controversial. I believe the viewpoint I have given because, to me, it seems to best fit with the record of Scripture. I realize that many people find it offensive and appalling to suggest that there will be those condemned to an eternity in Hell who never even heard the Gospel preached, but this is what the Word of God tells us. I pray that as we ponder this reality it gives us all the greater sense of urgency to get the Message of Christ to as many people as we can. In the end, God is fair and God is just. If He never offered His grace to a single living soul He would still be justified in condemning every last one of us. But praise God, He does offer His grace to as many as will accept it. For those who, like the comedian on the talk show that we mentioned at the beginning of this article, would rely on the objection of what God will do with those who have never heard as a reason for their own unbelief, we should understand that God’s only question to all of us is: “What did YOU do with the Light I gave you?” The question of how God dealt with everyone else will be totally irrelevant when we stand before Him, for each of us will stand alone before Him someday. The only thing that will matter is how WE responded to the grace of God and the Message of the Gospel.