[DavidL]

hmkpoker

** How can a child deserve either? The child must have a knowledge of Jesus, be it through scripture, oral word, or divine revelation before he can accept the good news. How can God judge someone for an action he had no chance of committing? **

Sin is not just a case of doing wrong things, it is a state of being. Every descendant of Adam is born (or conceived) with a sinful nature. Selfishness, pride and defiance lie at the core of the sinful nature, and acts like murder, theft, rape, cheating, greed, and so on are merely the outworking, made visible by the setting of the material world.

It is not just a case of what a person deserves, or doesn't deserve. All (even the unborn) are sinners, and have fallen short of the righteousness of God. If one wants to be pedantic, then, everybody "deserves" eternal separation from a righteous God, regardless of the opportunity they've had the chance to "prosper" their sinful nature in the material world.

All sin is covered by the atoning blood of Christ. The demands of the law have been met, and God forgives unconditionally, because it is His nature to do so.

However, the Bible talks about one eternal, unforgivable sin. I am speculating here, but I believe that it is about seeking independence from God's presence on an eternal basis. God desires that all people be "saved", but He will not violate their freedom of choice. Thus the only "charge" that can be laid upon Him is the gift of free will.

Consider the alternative: how frustrating it would be if all (or even some) of the choices we make in life were constantly being overridden by God. For example, I want to play golf every Saturday, but God would rather that I spend the time looking after the elderly in a geriatric hospital. A dumb example, perhaps, but I expect you see my point :-)

** Lastly, if the heart was "repentant," then that suggests that not all hearts are created equally. That compromises both free will and God's fairness. **

Repentance is not the result of knowledge, but humility, and that humility is either forcibly planted by God, or is a free choice. Calvinists might disagree, but I support the latter view, because the former appears to me to be incongruous and self-defeating. There are Bible verses that can be prioritized to support both views.

Two men were crucified with Christ. One cursed God for his agony, perhaps because he believed his sentence was unjust, or perhaps he simply blamed God for everything that had gone wrong in his life. The other recognized Christ for whom He was, and seeing Him suffering, sought not to selfishly ask for his own freedom from torture, but for Christ's forgiveness. Apparently he saw a greater picture. Otherwise, I can not explain why two individuals suffering the same fate would hold such divergent views. Supposedly both were free to take either position.

We are in some way confronted with much the same choice. Either we blame God for the ill-used free will that causes poverty, injustice, violence, oppression etc in the world, or we look humbly inward and acknowledge our part in it, ultimately in the hope that we might not only share His righteous grief, but also partake in measures to somehow turn the tables around.

David