Were You Created to Be Tortured Forever?

[Diaconeo]

Well, I was hoping for a snotty 5 pointer but in a pinch, you’ll do. Maybe you will be more forthcoming with answers to the questions that bug me so much. *insert thumbsup smilie*
How does a God of love and mercy who claims to be prefect in impartial justice, step over some unrighteous people to endow other unrighteous people with saving faith?

The fact that no one could, by any power of their own, choose Christ in the first place makes Grace all that more precious? No, it makes it that much more unfair.

I am wondering why it is that when one objects to the teaching of eternal punishment for the wicked, the arguement always goes toward God's attributes of Love and Mercy with a misunderstanding of Grace. What of His attributes of Justice and Holiness. What of Righteousness? Where in the Bible does it say or attribute 'fairness' to God. His 'fairness' is that we should all, and in fact do, deserve to spend eternity in separation from his Glory.

People in general seem to mistake 'fairness' and 'justice' as meaning the same thing, when in fact it does not. Is it 'fair' that some are weathly beyong their needs and are wicked, while God's own children are living in poverty? It is 'fair' that God allows the wicked to prosper while suffering His childeren to His discipline, taken away what litte they might even have? Is it 'fair' that anyone is born 'guilty' of sin even before one can commit any sin? Is it 'fair' that others have and other have not? No, it is not 'fair'. It is not 'fair' that some seem to have escaped God's notice and are blessed for thier wickedness while other are chastened by Him, sometimes harshly. It is not 'fair' that some loose everything to natural desasters while others have no damage at all from it. The only thing is which God is 'fair' in is that those that believe in Him will get what He has promised, and those that don't believe in His Son will get exactly what He has promised them.

God is Love, and He does not desire that any should perish, even though it is exactly what everyone deserves. If God choses to punish some for disbelief (or disobedience) while rewarding others for belief (or obedience) then He is no less fair to those that have not believed then to those that have believed. God choses whom He will, and it is not a matter of 'fairness' but a matter of choice.

God would be complety Just to simply send everyone to the Lake of Fire, to allow everyone born to be eternally tormented in separation from His Glory. However, it is His Love that allows Him to be able to offer a payment for our sin, for someone else to pay our price (death). He demonstrated His Love by having His Son pay this price by dieing, shedding His own blood for us. That is how God's Love is demonstrated. Mercy is not really demonstrated in the choice of Life or Death, because He doesn't simply allow us to be set free from our Death sentance, but He goes beyond that, through His Grace, by giving us what we do not deserve, and that is eternity with Him. Simple anihilation would suffice for Mercy, allowing us to just simply 'be not'. That's Mercy, not getting what we desrve. Grace is getting what we do not deserve, and that's Eternal LIfe with Him. If everyone is going to be saved in the end, and spend eternity in the presence of our Glorious Lord, then why did Christ have to die? There is no reason, because God could just as eadily declared that all will have eternal life. This is not the case, howerever. Instead, this Grace is given only to those that believe in His Son. This is confirmed in 1 John 5:10-12 "The one who believes in the Son of God has the testimony in himself; the one who does not believe God has made Him a liar, because he has not believed in the testimony that God has given concerning His Son. And the testimony is this, that God has given us eternal life, and this life in in His Son. He who has the Son has the life; he who does not have the Son of God doe not have the life."

Those that are in Christ have their names written in the Lamb's book of Life (Rev. 3:5, 13:8, 17:8, 20:12,15, 21:27). Those who do not have their name written in the Lamb's book of Life are cast into the Lake of Fire, where the Devil, the false prophet and the Beast already are (Rev. 19:20, 20:10,14-15 ). It is in Rev. 20:14 that we see death and Hades (Hell, which is the ancient English goddess and her domain) are thrown into the Lake of Fire as well. Realizing that these two are figurative and symbolic, I don't believe that there is actually a being called Death or Hades. I do believe that this means that those that were in Hades (OT Sheol) are now in the Lake of Fire. We can argue what the Lake of Fire is for eternity, but the least we can say about it is that it is not a place of bliss, as is Abraham's bossum or the presence of our Lord.

There very next thing that happens, after the Beast and false prophet are cast into the Lake of Fire, after the millenial Kingdom (what ever belief is held), after the Devil is cast into the Lake of Fire, and after the wicked are cast there with the Beast, false prophet and the Devil, the very next thing is the creaton of the new Heaven and the new Earth. This now is eternity. There is nothing after the creation of the new Earth and Heaven and new Jerusalem. The lake of fire continues, and no one is released from its hold (Rev. 21:8)

I'm not arguing what the Lake of Fire is, simply that it is there in Scripture. That the Bible states very pointedly that the wicked, after the Great White Throne judgement, are cast there. We know from the Scriptures that it was created, not for man, but for the Devil and his angels. We know that the Beast and false prophet are cast into it, we know that the Devil joins him, we know that death and Hades are cast into the Lake of fire and we know that the wicked, whose name are not found in the Lamb's book of Life, are also cast into this same Lake of Fire. I cannot argue against what the Scriptures say, I can only agree with them. I don't have to like it and niether does anyone else, but you have to agree that the Scriptures state, in no confusing or uncertain languagea that there exists a Lake of Fire and that the wicked with eventually end up there. It's not my 'interpretation' or 'extrapulation'; I'm not putting things into the Scripture that are not there; I'm not twisting or distorting the Scripture in order to support what I beleive; I'm not taking away from the Scriptures. I'm stating the Biblical facts as written in the Scriptures.

I wish the Scriptures where less clear on this issue, because I would truly like to believe that those that do not come to a saving knowledge of Christ in their physical, worldly lifetime will ultimately end up spending eternity in the Glorious presence of our Almighty God and Saviour Jesus Christ. The simple truth of the Scriptures is that it just isn't true.

In His Grace,

Matthew

[Metacrock]

Well, I was hoping for a snotty 5 pointer but in a pinch, you’ll do. Maybe you will be more forthcoming with answers to the questions that bug me so much. *insert thumbsup smilie*
How does a God of love and mercy who claims to be prefect in impartial justice, step over some unrighteous people to endow other unrighteous people with saving faith?

The fact that no one could, by any power of their own, choose Christ in the first place makes Grace all that more precious? No, it makes it that much more unfair.

I think is a bit much "Unread." let's keep it civil

I am wondering why it is that when one objects to the teaching of eternal punishment for the wicked, the arguement always goes toward God's attributes of Love and Mercy with a misunderstanding of Grace. What of His attributes of Justice and Holiness. What of Righteousness? Where in the Bible does it say or attribute 'fairness' to God. His 'fairness' is that we should all, and in fact do, deserve to spend eternity in separation from his Glory.

The conventional interpretation of hell as eternal conscious torment is unjust, what is unjust is unrighteous, and therefore, not holy.

People in general seem to mistake 'fairness' and 'justice' as meaning the same thing, when in fact it does not. Is it 'fair' that some are weathly beyong their needs and are wicked, while God's own children are living in poverty? It is 'fair' that God allows the wicked to prosper while suffering His childeren to His discipline, taken away what litte they might even have? Is it 'fair' that anyone is born 'guilty' of sin even before one can commit any sin? Is it 'fair' that others have and other have not? No, it is not 'fair'. It is not 'fair' that some seem to have escaped God's notice and are blessed for thier wickedness while other are chastened by Him, sometimes harshly. It is not 'fair' that some loose everything to natural desasters while others have no damage at all from it. The only thing is which God is 'fair' in is that those that believe in Him will get what He has promised, and those that don't believe in His Son will get exactly what He has promised them.

Those things are not fair, they are not just either. Fairness and justice are different, but the come to the same thing and Bill Gathard was a nut. He argued this and I can't cotton to it for that reason. That's must my emotional side, but the examples you give above are both unjust and unfair. Most wealth is amassed through deceit and injustice. Show me a man who is rich and nine times out of ten I will show a liar, a cheater and a thief.

God is Love, and He does not desire that any should perish, even though it is exactly what everyone deserves.

No they don't. why do they deserve to have eternal conscious torment? Because we don't live up to a standard we are not capable of meeting in the first place. That's nothing more than a double bind.

If God choses to punish some for disbelief (or disobedience) while rewarding others for belief (or obedience) then He is no less fair to those that have not believed then to those that have believed. God choses whom He will, and it is not a matter of 'fairness' but a matter of choice.

but just said everyone deserves hell! If everyone deserves it then it is not fair that God reward undeserving group A and punish undeserving group B for some arbitrary reason.

God would be complety Just to simply send everyone to the Lake of Fire, to allow everyone born to be eternally tormented in separation from His Glory.

No he would not. Because (1) it's cruel (2) It's unjust because we start out of the shoot unable to live up the standard. Its' wrong just plain wrong to punish people for not keeping a standard they are not made capable of keeping.

However, it is His Love that allows Him to be able to offer a payment for our sin, for someone else to pay our price (death). He demonstrated His Love by having His Son pay this price by dieing, shedding His own blood for us.

which is also unfair and irrational. If we don't deserve it why should he give it to us, and then only those who say or believe a certain thing? If we all deserve hell why not give everyone the pardon?

That is how God's Love is demonstrated. Mercy is not really demonstrated in the choice of Life or Death, because He doesn't simply allow us to be set free from our Death sentance, but He goes beyond that, through His Grace, by giving us what we do not deserve, and that is eternity with Him. Simple anihilation would suffice for Mercy, allowing us to just simply 'be not'. That's Mercy, not getting what we desrve.

That's the irrational double bind.

Grace is getting what we do not deserve, and that's Eternal LIfe with Him. If everyone is going to be saved in the end, and spend eternity in the presence of our Glorious Lord, then why did Christ have to die?

No one deserves it but then why only give it to group A and not everyone?

There is no reason, because God could just as eadily declared that all will have eternal life. This is not the case, howerever. Instead, this Grace is given only to those that believe in His Son.

yea, why? that seems arbitrary. It really seems like that is doing something to get it.

This is confirmed in 1 John 5:10-12 "The one who believes in the Son of God has the testimony in himself; the one who does not believe God has made Him a liar, because he has not believed in the testimony that God has given concerning His Son. And the testimony is this, that God has given us eternal life, and this life in in His Son. He who has the Son has the life; he who does not have the Son of God doe not have the life."

that doesn't say what you think it does. That says that believing is doing something, and that disbelieving is a form of transgression, so that's doing something negative. It does not say that hell is eternal conscious torment, it says that believing is having life. But you are interipriting it a certain way to tease out of it the idea that hell is eternal conscious torment. It works just as well with my view that hell is a symbol of spiritual death and those reject God go poof rather than being tormented eternally in a conscious state.

Those that are in Christ have their names written in the Lamb's book of Life (Rev. 3:5, 13:8, 17:8, 20:12,15, 21:27). Those who do not have their name written in the Lamb's book of Life are cast into the Lake of Fire, where the Devil, the false prophet and the Beast already are (Rev. 19:20, 20:10,14-15 ).

which could clearly be both unfair and unjust depending upon what one has to do to get written up in the LBL.

It is in Rev. 20:14 that we see death and Hades (Hell, which is the ancient English goddess and her domain)

no i don't think so. hades was the Greek abode of the dead. the actual Greek word in the text, what is it? I doubt very seriously that John would know anything about an English goddess.

are thrown into the Lake of Fire as well. Realizing that these two are figurative and symbolic, I don't believe that there is actually a being called Death or Hades. I do believe that this means that those that were in Hades (OT Sheol) are now in the Lake of Fire. We can argue what the Lake of Fire is for eternity, but the least we can say about it is that it is not a place of bliss, as is Abraham's bossum or the presence of our Lord.

I agree there.

There very next thing that happens, after the Beast and false prophet are cast into the Lake of Fire, after the millenial Kingdom (what ever belief is held), after the Devil is cast into the Lake of Fire, and after the wicked are cast there with the Beast, false prophet and the Devil, the very next thing is the creaton of the new Heaven and the new Earth. This now is eternity. There is nothing after the creation of the new Earth and Heaven and new Jerusalem. The lake of fire continues, and no one is released from its hold (Rev. 21:8)

I'm not arguing what the Lake of Fire is, simply that it is there in Scripture. That the Bible states very pointedly that the wicked, after the Great White Throne judgement, are cast there. We know from the Scriptures that it was created, not for man, but for the Devil and his angels. We know that the Beast and false prophet are cast into it, we know that the Devil joins him, we know that death and Hades are cast into the Lake of fire and we know that the wicked, whose name are not found in the Lamb's book of Life, are also cast into this same Lake of Fire. I cannot argue against what the Scriptures say, I can only agree with them. I don't have to like it and niether does anyone else, but you have to agree that the Scriptures state, in no confusing or uncertain languagea that there exists a Lake of Fire and that the wicked with eventually end up there. It's not my 'interpretation' or 'extrapulation'; I'm not putting things into the Scripture that are not there; I'm not twisting or distorting the Scripture in order to support what I beleive; I'm not taking away from the Scriptures. I'm stating the Biblical facts as written in the Scriptures.

just a metaphor for cessation of existence.

I wish the Scriptures where less clear on this issue, because I would truly like to believe that those that do not come to a saving knowledge of Christ in their physical, worldly lifetime will ultimately end up spending eternity in the Glorious presence of our Almighty God and Saviour Jesus Christ. The simple truth of the Scriptures is that it just isn't true.

In His Grace,

Matthew

[/quote]


I am going to make a thread about my views on sin and sa I think I come accorss at the first of this as an almost skeptic. I do not deny the corss. I believe in the Salvation of christ and our need for it. I just object to the way it is pitched by well meaning people who are working in a pradigm of hell as eternal conscious torment. I think you are still in that paradigm even though you see the problems with it, or some of them.

[Diaconeo]

All,

I thought this was a biblical theology/doctrine board where argument is made from scripture. My assumption must have been wrong, because the only argument that I am getting is not from Scripture but from one's own personal idea of fairness, love and mercy. Argue from the Scriptures or don't argue at all. God does not care about our personal ideas if they do not sync with His. I have presented, from Scripture what God has to say about Hell and have been argued in kind from personal feelings on the subject. Deal with the Scripture or be silent in front of God.

Meta,

I have already explain Hell. It is the English (or Celtic more like than not) equivilant of Hades. Of course John would not have known about Hell as he was dealing in the Greek. It's interpretive. You wont find Hell anywhere in the original languages. I'm not arguing that. I'm arguing the concept of Hell since that is what the original question posed. If Hades or the Lake of Fire or eternal torment was meant and not Hell, it should have been stated better. My original post dealt with the concept of Hell, from both a general and a more specific concespt from both the Old and New Testaments. It's not my concept, I just try and deal with it as best I can from the Scriptures.

I don't mind getting beat up on these boards. I completely understand that most people don't hold the same view of Scripture the I do. But I would expect, at the very least, argument to be made from Scripture, and not one's personal feelings about what is 'fair' or not.

Oh, by the way, just and righteous are the same greek word (as is faith and belief) so that what is unjust is by definition unrighteous.

In Christ,

Matthew

[ZAROVE]

I will give you verses, that show why I do not accept he Calvinary approach to Scriptures.


I beelive that we all have a choice in our Salvation, and that God is not willign that any shoudl Perish, and shall show why.


The firts is famous, from the Gospel of SaintJohn, Chapter 3.

14. And as Moses lifted up the serpent in the wilderness, even so must the Son of man be lifted up:
15. That whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but have eternal life.
16. For God so loved the world, that he gave his only begotten Son, that whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but have everlasting life.
17. For God sent not his Son into the world to condemn the world; but that the world through him might be saved.
18. 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.


Second Peter records these words in the Third Chapter.

9. The Lord is not slack concerning his promise, as some men count slackness; but is longsuffering to us-ward, not willing that any should perish but that all should come to repentance.


I se only that God will allow us an oportunity for repentance, not that he has slelected the svaed and the Damend beforetime.

[Metacrock]

All,

I thought this was a biblical theology/doctrine board where argument is made from scripture. My assumption must have been wrong, because the only argument that I am getting is not from Scripture but from one's own personal idea of fairness, love and mercy. Argue from the Scriptures or don't argue at all. God does not care about our personal ideas if they do not sync with His. I have presented, from Scripture what God has to say about Hell and have been argued in kind from personal feelings on the subject. Deal with the Scripture or be silent in front of God.

First of all this board is about both Bible and theology. There's no requirement that theology come from the Bible. This site is about free speech and trading ideas and discussion.I am not in charge of how other people argue. It's all up the individua.

I think ideas matter. It's silly to me to say "you are just arguing about your idea of justice." justice is important. If the Bible is true, and of course I think it is> then it's going to agree with justice, because Justice is one of the most basic things that we all know is right. WE dno't need the bible to say "Justice is good" because we knkow it is. Just like we don't need the Bbile to say "God is real" because knew he is. Now it's good that we have the Bible and God wants us to have the Bible. But the Bible is not going to say Justice is wrong.

Meta,

I have already explain Hell. It is the English (or Celtic more like than not) equivilant of Hades. Of course John would not have known about Hell as he was dealing in the Greek. It's interpretive. You wont find Hell anywhere in the original languages. I'm not arguing that. I'm arguing the concept of Hell since that is what the original question posed. If Hades or the Lake of Fire or eternal torment was meant and not Hell, it should have been stated better. My original post dealt with the concept of Hell, from both a general and a more specific concespt from both the Old and New Testaments. It's not my concept, I just try and deal with it as best I can from the Scriptures.

the bible doesn't say that Hades is English.

I don't mind getting beat up on these boards. I completely understand that most people don't hold the same view of Scripture the I do. But I would expect, at the very least, argument to be made from Scripture, and not one's personal feelings about what is 'fair' or not.

Oh, by the way, just and righteous are the same greek word (as is faith and belief) so that what is unjust is by definition unrighteous.

In Christ,

Matthew

I can argue form scripture on pre destination when I want to. I don't know any better way to get a head ache except the ontological argument.

I don't want to chase you off. I appreacite you posting and I don't mean to lnsult you. this is must my personal feeling. But I think the tulip guys that I've argued with see God as a big bully or a drunk in bar. he's just big bad ass dude whose going smack you down if he wants to to prove he cn do it. then because they fear th big bully they go "O but he's so right to do that, yes, he's totally right and just becuase he's God!"

but God says love is the deal, I can show that in scripture. But then, if the hard core Calvinists are right, he just acts like a big arbitrary bully and you want me to find verses that say "God is not a big arbitrary bully and he would not be unjust." well there aren't any. There aren't any not because he is like that. but because it didn't come up. no one in his right mind would ever think God would be like that. So they didn't say "God is not like that."

I really do not see the point in having a scripture slough fest over Calvinism because its futile. I believe arminianism because I'm not in the elect, according to them,so they will never accept my view of scripture because that would mean they are not in the elect. So I"m predesignated to believe worngly why try to change? it wouldnt' do any good anyway.

[Metacrock]

hey if you want a scripture slough fest, zor is your is boy! He's Church of Christ! He will argue Scripture with you until the beast is sealed in the abyss.

[unred typo]

Meta, I agree with most of what you wrote but this was kind of a thump I didn‘t understand:

I think is a bit much "Unread." let's keep it civil

What I said, I said in jest, and didn’t mean any offence. I’m hoping you were kidding too. I wasn’t implying that Diaconeo was a snotty 5 pointer, anyways. In fact, the opposite. I was teasing him that I would have more fun cutting up his arguments if he were. I donno. I had my ’just kidding’ hat on, too. Maybe you’re coming from a vicious doctrinal split up mess and you’re reading some of that into my post. Maybe I’ve been beat up for being ’uncivil’ too many times on other boards when I was one of the most civil ones in the discussion. Maybe I can just chalk it up to PMS? Maybe my new picture is too blond. Maybe I’m just having a bad hair day. Gotta be the hair…. Or the woeful lack of smilies…. That’s it. Not enuff smilies. *insert pouty face*>>>*tantrum smilie*

hey if you want a scripture slough fest, zor is your is boy! He's Church of Christ! He will argue Scripture with you until the beast is sealed in the abyss.

sounds like my kinda guy. Except we agree pretty much on this issue. I don't care for knock down drag outs, but I can deliver a punch if I have to. Rather have a nice lively, not too deadly serious, discussion. While hell is a serious topic, what we believe about it isn't going to change the truth one iota. I don't think any of us has enough personal experience to be an expert anyways.

[unred typo]

While all of this about the different words referring to the place called hell, etc. is interesting, I really wanted to focus on the aspect of God’s creating people specifically to go there. I guess I should have framed my OP question as; How many here have been created to be eternally tormented?

Maybe I’ll go back and rephrase that in the Title, if it will let me edit my OP. (oh btw, jfyi, that’s ‘Opening Post,’ jic you are unfamiliar with the abr. I know it’s OT but NP, someone asked the Q. HTH. Sometimes these abr. are a PITA.)

Diaconeo wrote:
I am wondering why it is that when one objects to the teaching of eternal punishment for the wicked, the arguement always goes toward God's attributes of Love and Mercy with a misunderstanding of Grace. What of His attributes of Justice and Holiness. What of Righteousness? Where in the Bible does it say or attribute 'fairness' to God. His 'fairness' is that we should all, and in fact do, deserve to spend eternity in separation from his Glory.

People in general seem to mistake 'fairness' and 'justice' as meaning the same thing, when in fact it does not. Is it 'fair' that some are weathly beyong their needs and are wicked, while God's own children are living in poverty? It is 'fair' that God allows the wicked to prosper while suffering His childeren to His discipline, taken away what litte they might even have?
On the issue of fairness, God is shown to be very fair in the Bible. I don’t know how you can separate fairness from justice. I see how you have done it, by comparing external differences in wealth, and so on, but those things are going to be taken into account in the judgment. Of whom much is given, much will be required. The poor will get the same justice as the rich and everyone will be judged by their works in relation to the amount of truth they received. Those who only had their conscience to guide them will be judged by those standards, while those who had the full gospel will be judged by that.

Diaconeo wrote:
? Is it 'fair' that anyone is born 'guilty' of sin even before one can commit any sin?

I know we are taught that we are guilty of sin from the moment we are conceived, but I think this is another misunderstanding of the phrase, “in sin did my mother conceive me,” from David. I believe that makes more sense to say his mother was a sinner, than to claim he was. We are all born under the penalty of sin, since Adam had no eternal life to pass on to his descendants. We can only inherit life from being born of Christ through the Spirit. If you remember Paul saying, “I was alive once, before the commandment came, and then sin revived and I died”, you get the idea that children, before they know the difference between right and wrong, are innocent and “of such is the kingdom of heaven.” So, we are guilty of our own sin, not Adam’s.

Diaconeo wrote:
If everyone is going to be saved in the end, and spend eternity in the presence of our Glorious Lord, then why did Christ have to die? There is no reason, because God could just as eadily declared that all will have eternal life. This is not the case, howerever. Instead, this Grace is given only to those that believe in His Son. This is confirmed in 1 John 5:10-12 "The one who believes in the Son of God has the testimony in himself; the one who does not believe God has made Him a liar, because he has not believed in the testimony that God has given concerning His Son. And the testimony is this, that God has given us eternal life, and this life in in His Son. He who has the Son has the life; he who does not have the Son of God doe not have the life."

Everyone could be saved if they would drop their own interests and love God and one another as we were taught by Christ, since his blood was sufficient for all. But because of greed, lust, pride, jealousy and selfishness, most people want their own way and to exalt themselves rather than God, so they are not going to be allowed to take their rebellion into God’s new heaven and earth. When they are weighed in the balance, they will be found lacking.

Diaconeo wrote:
I wish the Scriptures where less clear on this issue, because I would truly like to believe that those that do not come to a saving knowledge of Christ in their physical, worldly lifetime will ultimately end up spending eternity in the Glorious presence of our Almighty God and Saviour Jesus Christ. The simple truth of the Scriptures is that it just isn't true.

I think there is some wiggle room that you have overlooked, such as the idea that the fires may be everlasting and were created to hold the devil and his followers where they can never escape, and humans are not eternal beings so after their sins are burned away, they may be saved, so as by fire, if there is anything left to save. The sincere love that a person has for others and God is going to endure, because such deeds are wrought in God, so perhaps the amount of love they have will save them, if anything will, after their evil has been burned away. I’m not catholic, but there may be some truth to the purgatory idea.


But enough about me, what do you think about the new improved topic title? Do you believe as some calvinists do, that some people were created specifically to live out their lives foreordained to be eternally tormented?

[unred typo]

OK, I changed the title but I had to reword it so it would fit. (Longer lines. We need longer title lines. 'Title paragraphs' would be nice. Meta, put that on my list... just under the 'more smilies' ) Maybe it is too obvious that I am rabidly anti-calvinistic and it may frighten any 5 pointers away. I'm open to suggestions here....

[KR Wordgazer]

I am wondering why it is that when one objects to the teaching of eternal punishment for the wicked, the arguement always goes toward God's attributes of Love and Mercy with a misunderstanding of Grace. What of His attributes of Justice and Holiness. What of Righteousness?

Well, I can see that the justice of God requires dealing with evil, and that those who refuse salvation are going to be subject to that justice-- but it seems to me that an understanding of justice must also include the just responsibility of a creator of anything, over the thing created. This is especially true when the thing created happens to be a self-aware personality. So God is just in condemning the wicked-- but not until God has done His uttermost to save them. That's just responsible creation. The idea that God would deliberately create some people without the slightest intention of trying to save them, but has already consigned them beforehand to eternal torment (or even eternal destruction, which I think is the more likely interpretation of the scriptures), is simply irresponsible. God is not irresponsible. And then we have the passages Zarove quoted: that God so loved the world, and that whosoever will could be saved. Also that He is not willing that any should perish, but that all should come to repentance. Now, I'm willing to grant that the Scriptures state that humans are sunk in sin, and that we can't come to God unless He draws us-- but I think the above passages make it clear that God must be drawing everyone. Some, therefore, are resisting, and He is allowing them to resist-- because there are a good many passages in the Bible that show that God values our choices and gives us the ability to make choices.

What, then, are we to make of Romans 9? It says that God has mercy on whom He wills, and hardens whom He wills. But I think the passages surrounding that chapter make make it clear that it is speaking not of individual salvation, but of God's timing regarding how He reaches out to and draws nations and people groups. It speaks of Israel being hardened, but it also speaks of Israel hardening herself: "All day long I have stretched out My hands to a disobedient and contrary people." Rom 10:21. God's hardening of Israel, then, was giving Israel what she herself wanted. But as for individuals within Israel-- "Even so, then, at this present time there is a remnant according to the election of grace." Rom 11:5. The election of grace is on those who choose it. This is clear by the example from Elijah's time given in the same chapter, verse 4: "I have reserved to myself seven thousand who have not bowed the knee to Baal." God reserved them then because they did not bow the knee to Baal-- it was something they chose not to do. Even so, today those who seek righteousness but "did not seek it by faith, but as it were by the works of the law" and "have stumbled over the stumbling stone" have done so by choice. Rom. 9:31. Romans 10:13, which is part of the same passage, concludes, "whosoever calls on the name of the Lord shall be saved."

So it is not only the mercy of God, but the justice of God, that has done and is doing all He can to save all whom He created-- and it is their choice when they are not saved. There is no such thing as a person created for damnation. That is contrary to both justice and mercy.