Why are we separated from God?

[LittleLion]

Why are we separated from God?



Because we are sinful?

Or because we are creatures who have been given free will by their creator?



If we are separated from God due to being sinful, then we have separated ourselves from God by our own doing, whereby free will is merely a burden, a way to blame us for being separated from God.
Then, believing in God and wanting to be saved is merely a guilt trip.


If we are separated from God because we are creatures who have been given free will by their creator, then this separation is not our fault, and we are not to be blamed for the separation -- and we can also not work ourselves out of this separation.



Which is it?

 

[heron]

The salvation is freedom from guilt, so if the guilt drove someone toward salvation, it shouldn't last long.

Free will is a good thing, which can lead to bad results. That's kind of obvious. Without free will, we'd be cloney robots.

Separation from God is our choice. If God says that we shouldn't pull someone's hair, and we do, we are separating ourselves from His wisdom. Being so sure of ourselves and our plans, we choose to ignore God's advice and do what we want.

To understand what sin is, you'd need to look through Leviticus a bit. The laws were community rules...don't abuse each other, don't force others to work unreasonably, don't do shady business practices to cheat each other, find ways to contain the spread of disease.

People generalize about God and sin, as if he's a selfish Greek god who wants his own way. The laws, though, were to bring people into a sense of community where they respect each other, celebrate with each other, allow breaks and forgiven debt.
​

 

[E_Powers]

He is a holy god, meaning he can do no wrong. because of this he holds us to his standard for behavior. but sin keeps us from that standard. And thus keeps us from him. what tends to push god further is when we know what we did is sin anyways and we keep doing the acts.


but jesus was sent here for a few reasons, one to show man a sinless life is possible. and 2 redeem us through his death. and three that God love us so much he was willing to sacrafice his son in order not to lose us forever.

 

[Nightfire]

What happened was that God was not believed. And I don't mean out of a fallen state - He was known, but He spoke and was ignored. This hardening of people's hearts has led them into ignorance, "forgetting" God. And people get born in this ignorant world, needing some way - some beacon - to find their way back to Him. This is why God is patient with us. He knows we are lost.

Luke 19:10 For the Son of Man came to seek and to save what was lost.​

So where free will is really a blessing, it can be abused. And when freedom is abused it affects other freedoms, and other blessings. The problem is that many people have simply adjusted to the dark, so to speak. They have started investing in this fallen state, and now have things they would rather keep hidden, instead of admitting that they are strangling. In other words, the problem is not so much that we are lost or separated anymore, but that people accept it, hide in it, or are so ashamed (or proud) of it that they don't try to do anything about it.

John 3:19-21
This is the verdict: Light has come into the world, but men loved darkness instead of light because their deeds were evil. Everyone who does evil hates the light, and will not come into the light for fear that his deeds will be exposed. But whoever lives by the truth comes into the light, so that it may be seen plainly that what he has done has been done through God."​

 

[Nightfire]

We're mice who were caught in the oven looking for forbidden food - caught out and now hiding in it. But it will have to be used soon, and God wants us to come out of it, telling us about the nature of fire and warning us of danger, but for various reasons we resist - whether paralyzed by fear, or simply too comfortable, the forbidden food still too tasty.

So He revealed himself as someone like us, in the form of a mouse, and gained our trust, showing us what happens when the heat is turned up, when all hope is lost and when the worst comes to the worst, taking all that pain and suffering on himself in order to show how He would protect us while we escape. He hopes we will see his sincerity, keep trusting Him, and at last accept that offer (which has been available since the beginning) - and hopefully we will consider that offer seriously before things heat up around us, causing further fear and confusion. Already some parts of the oven are hotter than others, herding us closer to the door - but now the food smells so much nicer as well...

2 Peter 3:9 The Lord is not slow in keeping his promise, as some understand slowness. He is patient with you, not wanting anyone to perish, but everyone to come to repentance.​

 

[Rafael]

Without a full choice between what represents good and evil, I agree with Heron that we would be preprogrammed creatures incapable of love. Love is never forced, and God is love, seeking to see the development of love in His creation in man. He is the biggest giver of all. He has given everything of Himself and even suffered the experience and penalty of death in the flesh and going into hell. However, He defeated this penalty of death and rose to new life as the first of many brethren who would follow after Him in likewise manner. Through the death of One man, Jesus, the death that entered into this world through the other one fman, Adam, has been canceled for those who will accept this gift by faith - believing on Him.

Ro 5:15 And what a difference between our sin and God’s generous gift of forgiveness. For this one man, Adam, brought death to many through his sin. But this other man, Jesus Christ, brought forgiveness to many through God’s bountiful gift.

Ro 5:17 The sin of this one man, Adam, caused death to rule over us, but all who receive God’s wonderful, gracious gift of righteousness will live in triumph over sin and death through this one man, Jesus Christ.

Ro 5:19 Because one person disobeyed God, many people became sinners. But because one other person obeyed God, many people will be made right in God’s sight.

 

[JimO]

Why are we separated from God?...Which is it?

Mankind wasn't always separated from God (Adam and Eve), but man decided to let pride get in the way and separated himself from God through original sin. Original sin was committed by man who was in full communion with God and yet he chose to disobey. Sadly, this originial sin was passed on to all of mankind as a tendancy toward sin (disobedience, pride, "I'll do it my way, thank you", who needs God, etc.). It is all essentially a rejection of God and an unwillingness to submit to anything, even unconditional love. God sent His Son, Jesus Christ to pay the penalty for our sin and to reconcile mankind with God. The difference is that we are born into sin and must choose God, whereas with Adam and Eve, they were born into grace and chose to reject God.

Without an understanding of the fall of mankind, one cannot reconcile the free will versus separation from God question.

Your various questions are thought provoking but I get mixed signals as to whether you are truly seeking and looking for answers.

 

[LittleLion]

Heron,

Separation from God is our choice. If God says that we shouldn't pull someone's hair, and we do, we are separating ourselves from His wisdom. Being so sure of ourselves and our plans, we choose to ignore God's advice and do what we want.

Well, if we indeed knew for a fact what God's will is, then we could talk about ignoring it. But if it is unclear what God's will – then how can we be accused of ignoring it or not doing it?

* * *

Nightfire,

What happened was that God was not believed. And I don't mean out of a fallen state - He was known, but He spoke and was ignored. This hardening of people's hearts has led them into ignorance, "forgetting" God.

When exactly was this?

And people get born in this ignorant world, needing some way - some beacon - to find their way back to Him. This is why God is patient with us. He knows we are lost.

In the light of this, when is something rightly called wilful rebellion against God?


* * *

Nightfire,

We're mice who were caught in the oven looking for forbidden food - caught out and now hiding in it. But it will have to be used soon, and God wants us to come out of it, telling us about the nature of fire and warning us of danger, but for various reasons we resist - whether paralyzed by fear, or simply too comfortable, the forbidden food still too tasty.

So He revealed himself as someone like us, in the form of a mouse, and gained our trust, showing us what happens when the heat is turned up, when all hope is lost and when the worst comes to the worst, taking all that pain and suffering on himself in order to show how He would protect us while we escape. He hopes we will see his sincerity, keep trusting Him, and at last accept that offer (which has been available since the beginning) - and hopefully we will consider that offer seriously before things heat up around us, causing further fear and confusion. Already some parts of the oven are hotter than others, herding us closer to the door - but now the food smells so much nicer as well...
2 Peter 3:9 The Lord is not slow in keeping his promise, as some understand slowness. He is patient with you, not wanting anyone to perish, but everyone to come to repentance.

For one, I don't like your mice analogy. Are we mice to God?
For two, as for "at last accepting that offer": Some never see it as an offer.


* * *

Rafael,

Ro 5:17 The sin of this one man, Adam, caused death to rule over us, but all who receive God’s wonderful, gracious gift of righteousness will live in triumph over sin and death through this one man, Jesus Christ.

Ro 5:19 Because one person disobeyed God, many people became sinners. But because one other person obeyed God, many people will be made right in God’s sight.

In the light of these verses, would you say that man's nature is inherently sinful?
Or is it that man, when born, is pure, but then becomes stained with sin through the people (for the sin transcends the sinner) around him, who raise him?


* * *

JimO,

Mankind wasn't always separated from God (Adam and Eve), but man decided to let pride get in the way and separated himself from God through original sin. Original sin was committed by man who was in full communion with God and yet he chose to disobey.

Well, Adam and Eva didn't know better until it was too late. I'm not so sure at all this can be called disobedience. God said no; but they also had no reason to believe the consequences would be bad – they didn't have the knowledge (until it was too late). Lacking knowledge isn't necessarily pride. And they were given free will – the environment presented certain options, and they chose what seemed appealing. This isn't sin yet per se.

Sadly, this originial sin was passed on to all of mankind as a tendancy toward sin (disobedience, pride, "I'll do it my way, thank you", who needs God, etc.).

I disagree. You make it sound as if sin were something genetically inhered or something like that. I believe it is learned; taught by the immediate environment (people).

It is all essentially a rejection of God and an unwillingness to submit to anything, even unconditional love.

I also doubt this. Men want to submit to something, they have this proclivity. To what they submit, this is another matter; but they do wish to submit. They do not refuse all authority -- be it the authority of God, money, love, their own agenda of themselves, ... – they will always accept one.

God sent His Son, Jesus Christ to pay the penalty for our sin and to reconcile mankind with God. The difference is that we are born into sin and must choose God, whereas with Adam and Eve, they were born into grace and chose to reject God.

They didn't know what would happen; they were told the options, but lacked the experience to know what is best to avoid.

We *must* choose nothing in specific. If it is a *must*, then we do not have free will.

We have free will - the ability to make decisions. But having free will does not mean that we also provide the options we can choose from – the options are presented by the environment, or by God.

Without an understanding of the fall of mankind, one cannot reconcile the free will versus separation from God question.

I am troubled that man is painted in such black colours, as if man is inherently an enemy of God. A newborn even, an enemy of God?!

2Tim. 1:7
For God did not give us a spirit of timidity, but a spirit of power, of love and self-discipline.

Your various questions are thought provoking but I get mixed signals as to whether you are truly seeking and looking for answers.

Why do you think so? Because I am not simply accepting whatever anyone says?
I am looking for answers, but I also wish to understand them, hence the subsequent questions. If I make no effort to understand – then what's the point of asking in the first place?
I can only apologize if my inquisitive method is offensive to you, but if you believe what the Bible says, then you should give me the credit that I am merely trying to use my mind and not just blindly believe anything I am told.

 

[L.A.W.]

Free will is not a burden, but a gift and a gift you should be thankful for. God didn't want us to be dead, but alive because He is the God of the living, not the dead.

We are not separated from God because we have free will, but because of what we choose to do that results in us being separated from Him. God is good and does only good. He does no evil as many believes. What many people don't understand is that God is a God of love and a God of wrath. He loves us, but if He must, He will punish us. We love His mercy, but not His discipline, for all who doesn't know this. Satan decieved Eve to fall away from God's word as he did with the angels and souls before the foundation of the world. It was because of his decieving words that led Eve to choose to eat of the fruit of good and bad. God did warn Adam and Eve not to eat of it or they shall surely die, yet they did it anyways because of deciet. It is this deceit that is driving so many to stray from God's glory. But because of God's mercy and love, He is saving any who is willing to believe in His son, Yahushua. Some will willingly choose to stray away from God because they love this world and the wickedness of it and they believe they do not need God, but there are the lost souls who God is trying to reach and save.

 

[Nightfire]

Well, if we indeed knew for a fact what God's will is, then we could talk about ignoring it. But if it is unclear what God's will – then how can we be accused of ignoring it or not doing it?

Well, if you're looking for it set in stone... there's the Ten Commandments. But that proved insufficient in 613 ways and more (there are 613 basic Hebrew laws, and countless refinements of them).

Obedience begins with little, and gradually becomes more. We all began with "brush your teeth and go to bed".

When exactly was this?

Whenever you like, but I had Adam and Eve in mind.

In the light of this, when is something rightly called wilful rebellion against God?

I don't know the phrase except from you. Can you give me some scripture for it, and I will try to explain.

For one, I don't like your mice analogy. Are we mice to God?
For two, as for "at last accepting that offer": Some never see it as an offer.

One: haven't you used an analogy before?
Two: it doesn't matter so much how you choose to see it, but that you hear it. And the call for us to turn from sin has no meaning if it doesn't mean God forgives it.

Ephesians 2:8-9
For it is by grace you have been saved, through faith—and this not from yourselves, it is the gift of God—not by works, so that no one can boast.​

 

[LittleLion]

The question to ask is: Are we indeed separated from God? Now? If God is omnipresent, then we aren't -- unless "separation" has a specific meaning not yet clearly defined here.

* * *


Nightfire,

Whenever you like, but I had Adam and Eve in mind.

You said:

What happened was that God was not believed. And I don't mean out of a fallen state - He was known, but He spoke and was ignored. This hardening of people's hearts has led them into ignorance, "forgetting" God.

And then I asked "When exactly was that?"
"This hardening of people's hearts has led them into ignorance, "forgetting" God." -- this applies to me? I have somehow wilfully hardened my heart?

In the light of this, when is something rightly called wilful rebellion against God?

I don't know the phrase except from you. Can you give me some scripture for it, and I will try to explain.

I don't know where this is from. But ask non-Christians -- many will tell you that Christians have accused them of "wilful rebellion against God". Maybe the concept is from some approved interpretation of the Scripture.

One: haven't you used an analogy before?

I don't like yours. Analogies are not bad per se.

Two: it doesn't matter so much how you choose to see it, but that you hear it.

Why? Does my salvation somehow depend on you telling me certain things?
M...o...r...m...

And the call for us to turn from sin has no meaning if it doesn't mean God forgives it.
Ephesians 2:8-9
For it is by grace you have been saved, through faith—and this not from yourselves, it is the gift of God—not by works, so that no one can boast.

By grace, yes! Who knows if God will give grace to *me*.

 

[heron]

"If God is omnipresent, then we aren't"
Ha! Interesting logic.

I think that the term omnipresent was derived from a collection of verses, like Psalm 139:http://biblegateway.org/versions/?action=getVersionInfo&vid=31


7 Where can I go from your Spirit?
Where can I flee from your presence?

8 If I go up to the heavens, you are there;
if I make my bed in the depths, you are there.

9 If I rise on the wings of the dawn,
if I settle on the far side of the sea...



This one states more of a physical omnipresence, where spiritual separation from God implies emotional distance, usually by choice. But id we really got into the science of it, we might find that emotional distance really is physical waves and energy fields...hm. Need a nap now.

 

[Nightfire]

And then I asked "When exactly was that?"
"This hardening of people's hearts has led them into ignorance, "forgetting" God." -- this applies to me? I have somehow wilfully hardened my heart?

Adam and Eve knew God, but they chose to ignore Him. That's how I understand "willful rebellion". We are told that this affected everything around them - their circumstances and their very experience of it. Their children get born into these circumstances, and if they don't repent from it they are condoning it. Every decision in one direction makes it harder and harder to understand the opposite direction. Choices lead to other choices, and in retrospect this can be called a "hardening" or a "softening". We are intimately involved in every step of this process, because we are at its centre.

I don't know where this is from. But ask non-Christians -- many will tell you that Christians have accused them of "wilful rebellion against God". Maybe the concept is from some approved interpretation of the Scripture.

I have to ask non-Christians for "approved interpretations" of Scripture? Accusations don't make something true. I've looked up where the words "harden" and "heart" occur together in the Bible, and the impression I get is that it refers to our response to a prompting by God, directly or through our circumstances. It applies to everyone, from Pharoah resisting God's warnings (through Moses and in the from of plagues and hardships), to Jesus' own disciples (in Mark 6:52). It takes the form of arrogance and pride, or a simple unwillingness to change, but it doesn't distinguish saint or sinner like some eternal label.

I've heard it explained this way: the same sun that melts wax, hardens clay. The same circumstances that can make someone roll up in a ball, bitter and angry, can make a him realize his situation more clearly and seek change.

When Jesus asks his disciples whether their hearts are hardened, it was because they were worrying about trivialities and weren't paying attention. The Pharisees were asking Jesus for a sign "to test him", but they had no intention of believing. Jesus warned them against such hypocrisy (Luke 12:1), but they were so worried about what they could have done wrong this time, that they forgot to have faith because of signs they were given.

Mark 8:14-19
The disciples had forgotten to bring bread, except for one loaf they had with them in the boat. "Be careful," Jesus warned them. "Watch out for the yeast of the Pharisees and that of Herod."

They discussed this with one another and said, "It is because we have no bread."

Aware of their discussion, Jesus asked them: "Why are you talking about having no bread? Do you still not see or understand? Are your hearts hardened? Do you have eyes but fail to see, and ears but fail to hear? And don't you remember? When I broke the five loaves for the five thousand, how many basketfuls of pieces did you pick up?"

"Twelve," they replied. ...​

I don't like yours. Analogies are not bad per se.

I wasn't trying to make it likeable, I was trying to explain something.

Why? Does my salvation somehow depend on you telling me certain things?
M...o...r...m...

Well, since most of what you believe apparently comes from what you were told already, it seems rather important that you hear the rest - or should I say, the other side - of it. Why accept (at face value, apparently) what you were told the first time around, but resist what you are told after that? If words have made such an impact on your beliefs until now, your "salvation" just might depend on what you listen to, more than you realize.

By grace, yes! Who knows if God will give grace to *me*.

It's almost the main theme of the Bible! If God told us anything, it's that He intends to show everyone grace, but that sin could lead us right past it. God poured his grace on the world through Christ, and it has now reached your ears as well.

You have probably heard the song written by the ex-slave/slave trader John Newton after he became a minister:

Amazing grace! (how sweet the sound)
That sav'd a wretch like me!
I once was lost, but now am found,
Was blind, but now I see.​

And this was also Paul's experience. If grace applies to anyone, it applies most to those who feel they deserve it least:

2 Cor. 12:8-10
Three times I pleaded with the Lord to take it away from me. But he said to me, "My grace is sufficient for you, for my power is made perfect in weakness." Therefore I will boast all the more gladly about my weaknesses, so that Christ's power may rest on me. That is why, for Christ's sake, I delight in weaknesses, in insults, in hardships, in persecutions, in difficulties. For when I am weak, then I am strong.​

 

[zak777]

God gave us free will, because He is love, and "love" by force is no love at all. God knows this, and so, He gave us the ability to either love Him, or to hate Him. This is a very important point to make, NO ONE HAS TO SIN, if we had no choice but to sin, then it would not be sin at all. But God, in His infinite wisdom, knew that NO MAN would live his life free from the stain of sin, and so, with uncomprehendable love, God became flesh and blood and was tortured and killed in our place, He took the weight of sin upon Himself. God gave us the freedom to love Him in Paradise, we chose to betray Him with a snake. He then births us into the world as pure children, innocent in His eys, as Jesus says of children: "The kingdom of Heaven belongs to those like these" and as our "knowledge" grows we turn our back to God again, and so now God has given us the simplist, and most beautiful way to stand before Him pure, and that is simply beliveing that Jesus became flesh, died and rose again in atonement for our turning our backs to God. If we did not have free will, we could not love God because love is free; but having freewill does not mean you HAVE to sin, God merely knows we all have and will, but HE has payed the price for it, freely, because the love of God is free.

 

[LittleLion]

heron,

distancing

"If God is omnipresent, then we aren't"
Ha! Interesting logic.

Whew. Like, I totally knew this would happen. I posted my post, looked through it, saw that incomplete clause, but thought, "Nah, people are reasonable enough to infer properly". But no.

I said:

"The question to ask is: Are we indeed separated from God? Now? If God is omnipresent, then we aren't -- unless "separation" has a specific meaning not yet clearly defined here."

To mean:

"The question to ask is: Are we indeed separated from God? Now? If God is omnipresent, then we aren't INDEED SEPARATED FROM GOD -- unless "separation" has a specific meaning not yet clearly defined here."

Or have I broken some rule of English in my previous wording, which rendered my sentence to be understandable in only that one way as you put it?

...hm. Need a nap now.

Yes. I hope it was good.


* * *


Nightfire,

I have to ask non-Christians for "approved interpretations" of Scripture?

No. But Christians (as far as I know) do have "approved interpretations". Depending on the church/denomination. The RCC has "Reformed Tomism", for example.

(Like this one you present: "I've heard it explained this way: the same sun that melts wax, hardens clay. The same circumstances that can make someone roll up in a ball, bitter and angry, can make a him realize his situation more clearly and seek change.)

I don't like yours. Analogies are not bad per se.

I wasn't trying to make it likeable, I was trying to explain something.

Uh. If I see "2 + 2 = 5" I might say "I don't like this". Meaning, 'Something is wrong with this.'

Your analogys carries the additional information that "to God, we are mice -- God doesn't really care all that much for us, the same as we don't care much for mice."

Analogies and metaphors are good, but they have the inherent danger that certain, albeit non-central information in the metaphorical image may distort the content we are actually trying to bring across.
(To avoid this, philosophers have developed non-metaphorical methodologies of concept analysis. Unfortunately, those methodologies are rather demanding and wordy. )

Well, since most of what you believe apparently comes from what you were told already, it seems rather important that you hear the rest - or should I say, the other side - of it. Why accept (at face value, apparently) what you were told the first time around, but resist what you are told after that?

Because one of those things I was told first is that this is all there is.

If words have made such an impact on your beliefs until now, your "salvation" just might depend on what you listen to, more than you realize.

You scare me.

 

[zak777]

I suppose, since you are looking very deeply into the English of the matter, that God is not omnipresent because He is not found in sin. God has chosen to stay out of sin because of His very nature of perfection. So if your question is: "If God is everywhere, then how can we be seperated from Him?" then your very question is faulty, in that, God is not found in sin, so when we sin we go to the only place God is not, therefore, seperating ourselves from Him.

 

[Nightfire]

No. But Christians (as far as I know) do have "approved interpretations". Depending on the church/denomination. The RCC has "Reformed Tomism", for example.

(Like this one you present: "I've heard it explained this way: the same sun that melts wax, hardens clay. The same circumstances that can make someone roll up in a ball, bitter and angry, can make a him realize his situation more clearly and seek change.)

True, but these interpretations do not all lie on the same level or have the same significance. Many are attempts, cognitive constructs, to help us make sense of some things that are plainly there. For instance, one such "approved interpretation" is the doctrine of the Trinity. The apostles never used the expression, but there is no doubt that it corresponds to what they believed in practice. There are many such "summaries", and many ways to test them. That's the key: to test them against scripture, see if they hold. Interpretations that rely on a single reading of a single verse will obviously be more suspect than conclusions that rely on many independent texts. That's why scholarship continues, translations get better, and our understanding increases.

Uh. If I see "2 + 2 = 5" I might say "I don't like this". Meaning, 'Something is wrong with this.'

Your analogys carries the additional information that "to God, we are mice -- God doesn't really care all that much for us, the same as we don't care much for mice."

Analogies and metaphors are good, but they have the inherent danger that certain, albeit non-central information in the metaphorical image may distort the content we are actually trying to bring across.
(To avoid this, philosophers have developed non-metaphorical methodologies of concept analysis. Unfortunately, those methodologies are rather demanding and wordy. )

I rather like simple stories and parables because you don't have to explain every word in the text. They depend on an easily and generally accessible pool of understanding.

Even if I somehow implied that "to God, we are mice", I still said He became like a mouse himself. I thought it would be understood that he would have to care enough about the mice and little enough about his infinitely superior status to do that. There's nothing wrong with being mice to God in my story, unless you bring another story explaining how repulsive mice are, into it. The only parties present were the mice and God. What we outside the story think about mice is irrelevant.

It brings up an important point however, about how people might read Jesus' parables. He told many of them in such a way that his audience would recognize themselves so clearly that it would easily understand who represents whom in the story. So the Pharisees might react with indignity at a parable that doesn't even mention them. I made it clear who the mice are, but why do you associate them with despised beings, contrary to the spirit and intention of the whole story (which is supposed to explain what we learned from our history with God)?

Because one of those things I was told first is that this is all there is.

You have since heard many things after that, so it becomes more a question of who you believe, than who told it first.

You scare me.

And it scares me how much stock you still put into words that have since become doubtful or outdated, even to your own ears.

In any case, being scared doesn't change the fact that you have believed what people said in the past - your presents struggles are a direct result of some of those beliefs. Becoming overly suspicious about new information only now gives those first conclusions an unfair advantage, effectively vetoing anything to the contrary, not to mention a monopoly over truths that nobody but God may dispense.

 

[Rafael]

The seperation from God is not complete until the final judgment. Until that time, God suffers the presence of sin and evil, as we all move, breathe and have our being inside of God.

Acts 17:28 For in him we live, and move, and have our being; as certain also of your own poets have said, For we are also his offspring.

Ro 9:22 God has every right to exercise his judgment and his power, but he also has the right to be very patient with those who are the objects of his judgment and are fit only for destruction.

We are all God's creation, but through choices become seperated from His will, choosing to go against the knowledge of Him they are given. The Bible says that all men have seen His glory in the creation of the heavens, the earth, and even their own concious being, but trade that truth in for vain imaginations - thus seperating themselves from His will. He suffers them until the judgment because He waits and desires not be destroyed:

2 Peter 3:9 ¶ The Lord isn’t really being slow about his promise to return, as some people think. No, he is being patient for your sake. He does not want anyone to perish, so he is giving more time for everyone to repent.

Romans 1:18 But God shows his anger from heaven against all sinful, wicked people who push the truth away from themselves.
19 For the truth about God is known to them instinctively. God has put this knowledge in their hearts.
20 From the time the world was created, people have seen the earth and sky and all that God made. They can clearly see his invisible qualities—his eternal power and divine nature. So they have no excuse whatsoever for not knowing God.
21 Yes, they knew God, but they wouldn’t worship him as God or even give him thanks. And they began to think up foolish ideas of what God was like. The result was that their minds became dark and confused.
22 Claiming to be wise, they became utter fools instead.

Romans 2:13 For it is not merely knowing the law that brings God’s approval. Those who obey the law will be declared right in God’s sight.
14 Even when Gentiles, who do not have God’s written law, instinctively follow what the law says, they show that in their hearts they know right from wrong.
15 They demonstrate that God’s law is written within them, for their own consciences either accuse them or tell them they are doing what is right.
16 The day will surely come when God, by Jesus Christ, will judge everyone’s secret life. This is my message.