|
Proof, like beauty, however is in the eyes of the beholder. At Christ's First Coming, certainly there were conclusive proofs demonstrating the validity of His claim. God had not fallen short in providing everything people would have needed in order to recognize Him. To an open and unbiased mind, the proofs were overwhelming that He was indeed the Christ. In considering God's justice and mercy, it does not seem possible that He would have withheld from the people testimony that could have led to their salvation. The fact that those who persecuted Christ were punished for their actions speaks to the fact that they must have been given sufficient evidence that He was indeed their Savior, and that therefore they should have recognized Him (91:4) If anyone can provide testimony of the truth, surely God can. It is axiomatic that His proof must be the greatest proof of all. However, as the New Testament clearly demonstrates, it is equally axiomatic that not even His proof can persuade a mind bent on unbelieving: At Christ's First Coming, some believed, and some didn't. And even after two thousand years, some believe in Him, and some do not. I think it's safe to say that if someone does not want to believe, a choice they are free to make, they will simply never believe
(91:5)
|