Does a man that is stuck on an island his entire life apart from any other human contact, go to heaven if he dies? If he accepts the gospel of Christ, then he goes to heaven. This answer should be obvious, but in contemporary evangelicalism it is anything but obvious. Instead of the Scriptures having the final say on the issue, whatever we deem is “fair” often wins our opinion on the matter. We often say, “But, they cannot reject what they have never heard.”
Regardless which side you are on, we cannot say that sinners can be saved apart from trusting in Christ, unless we want to deny that Jesus is the Way, the Truth, and the Life, the only Way to get to God the Father (John 14:6); or that we want to deny that everyone on earth is a sinner (Rom. 3:23). After all, if everyone that does not hear the gospel automatically goes to heaven, then we should STOP sending missionaries. Because, what if we send a missionary to share the gospel, and the hearer rejects it? They are thus worse off than before they heard the good news. Furthermore, the Great Commission and the historic-redemptive nature of Scripture only make sense if the gospel is essential for salvation (Matt.28:18-20).
Furthermore, although the man on the Island does not know the gospel of Christ, he does know the God of creation and conscience (Rom. 1:18-21). He has a choice of whether or not he will accept or reject this God; and if he rejects this God, he is without excuse regardless if he ever hears the gospel on earth or not (Rom. 1:20). Thus, the Apostle Paul in Romans 1:18-32 argues that creation and conscience are enough information to drive sinners to the God of the Bible, but this general revelation is not enough information to save anyone (1 Cor. 15:1-4). The gospel cannot be deduced from creation and conscience alone.
Is there any hope then for the man on the Island? In Acts 10 we learn of a gentile named Cornelius that feared the God of Israel. We must notice that he responded to 1) the limited knowledge he possessed concerning God’s law (Acts 10:1-2), and 2) his conscience as well (Acts 10:1-2). He submitted to the God of Israel, prayed to Him always, and sought to love his neighbor as himself (Acts 10:2). As a result, God sent him the apostle Peter to share the gospel. *It is interesting how an angel told Cornelius to send for Peter instead of the angel himself telling the gospel to Cornelius. One however can argue that the Angel did not share the gospel with Cornelius because God was going to teach Peter through this experience as well. This argument is a sound concerning the context of Acts 10; but, based on the rest of the Scriptures, one cannot deny 1) the rarity angels are involved in sharing the gospel in Scripture, 2) that the salvation of souls through the gospel is not something that the angels are involved in (1 Pet. 1:12), and 3) Christ gave the Great Commission to His church, not to the many, many more powerful and supernatural (compared to humans) angels (Matt. 28:18-20).
In conclusion, does the man on the Island go to heaven or hell? Based on the Scriptures, 1) Sinners cannot be saved apart from the gospel of Christ (John 14:6), 2) The gospel of Christ is given primarily on earth through His church taking His good news to the ends of the earth (Matt. 28:18-20), 3) We have no biblical reason to believe that angels are involved in taking the gospel to the ends of the earth as well (1 Pet. 1:12), 4) If a sinner will submit to the God of creation and his conscience, then we can reasonably deduce from Scripture that God will send someone to preach the gospel to him: Cornelius (Acts 10:1-48), 5) If a sinner will not submit to the God of creation or his conscience, then this disobedience alone condemns him apart from his hearing of the gospel (Rom. 1:20), 6) If a sinner has already rejected the God of creation and of his conscience, then is it really “unfair” in even human terms for God not to give the gospel to these rejecters, 7) apart from sinners repenting and placing all their trust in the finished work of Christ, salvation is impossible. I will leave you with what Dr. Russell Moore concludes concerning this issue:
The question of the man on the island’s eternal destination is settled ultimately not by a consensus gained in a youth Bible study or in a breakout session of the Evangelical Theological Society, but in the words God has revealed to us in the Bible. The issue is no trivial matter since it encapsulates both the content of the gospel and the task of the Great Commission.
This question was not a matter of mere speculation to the apostles of the Lord Jesus Christ since they too had to wrestle with the destiny of the man of the island who had never heard the name of Jesus. And for the sake of those who were “separate from Christ, excluded from the commonwealth of Israel, and strangers to the covenants of promise, having no hope and without God in the world” (Eph. 2:12, NASB), they refused to reassure themselves with a manufactured sense of hope for the unevangelized. Instead they endured horrifying persecution to take the gospel to the Gentiles. In short, a North American Christian who ponders whether God is “unfair” to the man on the island should go to the nearest mirror. There he will find a graciously redeemed “man on the island” staring back at him.
You can read the rest of Dr. Moore’s article “The Man on the Island: Facing the Truth about those who Never Hear the Gospel” here.
What are your thoughts about “the man on the island”? Does he or she automatically go to heaven when he or she dies? Why?
What are your thoughts?
Chris Roberts (63)
Dave Miller (61)
Bob Hadley (48)
Debbie Kaufman (45)
dr. james willingham (44)
Les (30)
cb scott (29)
Rick Patrick (27)
Bill Mac (26)
Christiane (26)
Jared,
I have thought of your question over the last three years, “Does the “Man on the Island” Go to Heaven or Hell?”, in terms of losing my infant daughter at 9 days old, 3 years ago.
My question to you is in reference to this paragraph:
Furthermore, although the man on the Island does not know the gospel of Christ, he does know the God of creation and conscience (Rom. 1:18-21). He has a choice of whether or not he will accept or reject this God; and if he rejects this God, he is without excuse regardless if he ever hears the gospel on earth or not (Rom. 1:20). Thus, the Apostle Paul in Romans 1:18-32 argues that creation and conscience are enough information to drive sinners to the God of the Bible, but this general revelation is not enough information to save anyone (1 Cor. 15:1-4). The gospel cannot be deduced from creation and conscience alone.
My daugther, 9 days old, did not know the “God of creation and conscience”, does she have an excuse or is she without excuse? Is Christ her Mediator or not? She never knew general revelation let alone the gospel, what then? Is there such a thing as an Age of Accountability that allows ignorant children, infants and mentally retarded people into heaven because they lack knowledge and decision-making skills?
Sincerely,
Paul Schafer
Paul, my heart breaks for you and your family. I have two little ones myself, and hopefully more coming in the future. I’m so sorry to hear about your daughter.
Concerning children, I believe all children go to heaven based on the hints we have in Scripture. I do believe they are accountable for their sin, that they are indeed sinners, but that somehow they are covered in the blood of Christ because they are incapable of saving faith. Even God Himself cannot give saving faith to a child apart from maturing their brains because the ability to have faith in anything or anyone is not present within them. The man on the Island however has this ability, and often chooses to put his faith in someone or something else other than the God of his conscience and creation.
Paul, I also am so sorry for your loss. I can only imagine the pain in losing your precious daughter.
My earlier response to this post was before I had seen what your comments and questions were. I firmly believe that based on hints in scripture (as Jared noted) and in the character of God, that infants dying in infancy (and the mentally incapable) are immediately in the presence of Jesus. That does not mean that infants are not sinners. They are as are all persons. But God saves sinners. There is no reason, in my opinion and in the opinion of many reformed theologians now and in the past, to doubt that your daughter is with Jesus and that you and your wife will see her again.
Jared, good question and good answers. I agree with one addition. Though certainly not normal or expected in all cases, I think if one believes in monergism rather than synergism in the new birth, it is possible for the man to be born again or saved apart from someone showing up to preach to him. This would be the same as was the case many believe about John the Baptist and about infants dying in infancy as well as for the severely mentally handicapped. If those are elect and die without a preacher or without the ability to hear and understand a preacher, they must be born again without any human agent involved.
But, this is not the usual nor expected way. Just my thoughts.
Les, you’re correct. I agree as well that this is not the normal or expected way; but, God indeed can do what He wants. I think we may be surprised just how far reaching, concerning the nations, the gospel was when we get to heaven.
When the man on the island sees the attributes of the God revealed in the creation, it’s my firm belief that God then moves to reach him with the Gospel. I have seen that happen under circumstances which can only be described as miraculous.
It is, of course, the man’s place to either receive the gospel or reject it, but God is too good at what He does, to allow that man not to hear the gospel. The man just has to keep following the trail of breadcrumbs, as it were.
I loved your comment, BOB.
“The steps of a good man are ordered by the LORD: and He delighteth in his way. Though he fall, he shall not be utterly cast down: for the LORD upholdeth him with his hand.”
(Psalm 37:23,24)
Bob,
You may think God is too good to allow the man to not hear the gospel, but in fact that’s what happens all the time. There are MANY people who believe in a creator who don’t have clue who jesus is.
Gabe
It’s the tired old moderate inclusivism cliche’ “All religions lead to God. If someone is sincere and following their heart in their religion, God will accept their sincerity and their nicey-ness”. (Yawn)
So what
Les and Jared,
So you have a man on an island. He is either elect or non-elect. Therefore, no matter what:
1. If he is elect he will go to Heaven.
2. If he is non-elect he will go to Hell.
Is that your view?
David R. Brumbelow
David, I cannot speak for Jared. But the man on the island, and the woman in Atlanta or the child in Brazil or whoever wherever, if elect will absolutely go to heaven. Jesus will not lose even one the Father has given Him.
Les, wait for it….
That is more of a twisting of Calvinism than a fair representation of it, David.
Why not ask it this way?
So, you have a man on an island. God infallibly knows the man’s eternal home.
1. If the man is going to hell, can anything be done to stop it?
2. If the man is going to heaven, can anything be done to stop it?
Dave,
I thought what I said was rather mild. And I was just asking a question.
I asked it because of what Les said,
“Though certainly not normal or expected in all cases, I think if one believes in monergism rather than synergism in the new birth, it is possible for the man to be born again or saved apart from someone showing up to preach to him…If those are elect and die without a preacher or without the ability to hear and understand a preacher, they must be born again without any human agent involved.”
Why is my question a twisting of what Calvinists believe, and Les’ statement is acceptable? Is Les’ statement a twisting of what Calvinists believe?
David R. Brumbelow
David, of course the elect go to heaven and the non-elect go to hell. How could any bible believer deny this?
My view is that God saves through the gospel alone, whether it’s through preaching the gospel through His church or through angels, or visions, or dreams, God can indeed get the gospel to the ends of the earth however He chooses. However, we have little Scriptural reason to believe that God’s evangelism strategy goes beyond the local church. He has entrusted us with the gospel, and given us the responsibility to take it to the ends of the earth. I’m not going to deny that God may be preaching the gospel through other means; but, I have little if any biblical reason to believe this.
And, yes, the elect will go to heaven; but God has determined to call out the elect with the gospel… so, we preach it to all men, to the ends of the earth; and praise Him alone for calling the elect. I can’t brag on myself for anything; and I don’t assume that the salvation of the world is up to me. I sleep like a Calvinist.
BTW: Just for fun:
David,
So you have a man on an island. He is either smart enough to get saved or not smart enough to get saved.
Therefore, no matter what:
1. If he is smart enough he will go to heaven.
2. If he is not smart enough he will go to hell.
Is that your view? (I know it isn’t; but, what’s good for the goose is good for the gander.)
Jared,
You asked,
“So you have a man on an island. He is either smart enough to get saved or not smart enough to get saved.
Therefore, no matter what:
1. If he is smart enough he will go to heaven.
2. If he is not smart enough he will go to hell.
Is that your view? (I know it isn’t; but, what’s good for the goose is good for the gander.)”
My answer would be that you set the question up to your advantage. Scripture never sets it up, or presents it, as who is the smartest.
The question is if someone is presented with the Gospel, will he believe or not? If he believes (John 3:16; 5:24), receives (John 1:12), calls on the name of the Lord (Romans 10:13), he will be saved and go to Heaven. If he does not believe, he is condemned already and will go to Hell (John 3:18, 36).
David R. Brumbelow
I believe as you do that the man on the island will most certainly go to Hell…apart from Christ. No one will go to Heaven apart from Christ. All of those people, who are above the age of accountability, will go to Hell if they dont respond to the light that God has given them…whether it be the light of nature, or conscience, or the Gospel. The Bible is just too clear on this….lost people must be converted by the Gospel, or they’ll die in their sins and go to Hell. No man is innocent. All are guilty of sin. No man can escape the fact that he’s been given some light, even though it might not be the brightest light. Thus, no man will be able to go to Heaven apart from saving faith in the Lord Jesus Christ.
David
I like Sproul’s recounting of a conversation he had. Let’s call the man John:
John: “Dr. Sproul, what happens to the innocent native on a deserted island when he dies? Does he go to heaven or hell?”
Sproul: “He goes straight to heaven, do not pass go, do not collect $200.”
John: “But I thought you believed that people need to have faith in Christ alone in order to go to heaven.”
Sproul: “I do, but if that person on the island was truly innocent, then what crime would God be able to punish him for? Isn’t the proper question ‘Is there such a thing as a truly innocent person at all?”
In other words – it’s not “not hearing the gospel” that condemns a man, it’s his own sin.
Angels and messengers seem to share the same category.
The problem with hypotheticals is that they are used to promote how smart we are. God is not particularly verbose about how he makes his choices preferring Jacob over Esau and hardening Pharaoh’s heart.
The funny thing for me is my parents went to one of those islands and evangelized so that more would hear. Rather than entertain the hypothetical I would much rather encourage all if you to go as well.
If you believe God will not save unless someone hears, you have an extra obligation to dig deep to go AND to support others who go.
I do think the common role of angels, Christ, and Christians as messengers / witnesses should be further investigated, though.
As with most philosophical arguments, your whole premise is flawed and illogical. If one were indeed ‘stuck on an island his entire life apart from any other human contact’, that would mean that this man would have been born on the island and his mother died in child birth, with no other human around. This being the case, the infant would have soon died as well.
That being said, there are 2 verses you preacher-boys need to remember when having this discussion. John 14:6 and Matthew 28:19. The first tells us that NO ONE, not one person, can be ‘saved’ apart from Jesus. The second tells us that we are to be about the business of telling everyone about Jesus so they have the opportunity to be saved. Oh, and it wouldn’t hurt to throw in a little Romans 10:14-15 into the mix, too.
Praying you all have ‘beautiful feet.’
The question cannot be answered biblically. There is a reason why God doesn’t want us to know.
1) If we knew that the Man on the Island was going to hell, then we would:
a) despair over our failure
b) lack certainty in God’s election
(Your case here between “a” and “b” may differ depending on your soteriological sensibilities.)
2) If we knew that the Man on the Island was going to be saved, then we would have no reason to go.
God can save the Man on the Island without us. But it is important for our sake that He has called us to go and make him a disciple. It is important that we obey this call in our identity as the Body of Christ.
So when asked the question about the Man on the Island the best response is, “I don’t know, but I have the love of Christ for him. And lest he die in his sin without Christ I must be obedient to my Lord and go tell him.”
Comments on this entry are closed.