But in relation to God might it not be supposed that we are all very “stupid” indeed?
It would be foolish to assume that one must have an infinite knowledge and wisdom to be culpable of anything. We have a conscience, do we not? And is it possible to violate this conscience? If the answer is yes, then we have a culpability to a greater or lesser extent. Now, the formation of that conscience is another matter, but for the subject at hand it would be foolhardy to assume that we aren’t held up to a moral standard of sorts! And certainly someone as tender-hearted as yourself could understand that. We are designed for love.
Is this to mean that he neither loves them enough to take action, nor does he appreciate their discomfort? How could a being of love be so disconnected from such agonies?
The action, my friend, has been taken! Was he not knocking at the door their entire life? Did he not love them into existence, and with the very same love sustain them until their death? It is my opinion that Christ is suffering far more than any of the souls in hell by our rejection of him.
Was not your earlier position that God does not love as we do? If not, how is it that we are specifically designed to receive this love for which we have no correlation or understanding? Is not the concept of a loving father, obedient son, and personified loving spirit understandable? Is not the structure of a loving family equally understandable? If so, in what way is God’s loving nature different from ours?
Excellent question. This is the mystery of grace. We aren’t quite sure how it works. All we know is that, while it does not internally change our nature, it elevates our nature to the virtue of God’s. In such a way, the chasm of virtue between us is conditionally bridged, and we may become intimate with him.
Why would an almighty creator god of love be required to deprive any of Heaven in order to treat differently those destined for Hell? Is it beyond his ability to create two Heavenly orders, for example? If not, is not his solution of Hell solely at his own discretion? If so, what type of personality requires that one’s enemies suffer whilst they, in turn, enjoy great satisfaction and happiness?
Damnation is not a necessity. The possibility of damnation, however, is indeed necessary. And the reality of that possibility lies on the shoulders of the creature, not the creator. Keep heart, though. While, like I said earlier, I’m not too much into speculation on matters that aren’t immediately necessitous, I think it would be reasonable to assume that most souls are indeed saved. Most, likely by the skin of their teeth moments before their death; but none-the-less, we have a tendency to turn a contrite heart towards God in seemingly hopeless circumstances.
If it were true that God provides more grace than is required for the salvation of all, why are not all saved?
Not all scholastic theologians will give you the same answer (as there are many different types of answers). In our feeble intellect, wrapping our brains around the grand scheme of things is quite difficult. I think
this article might give you some food for though on this subject. If you feel inclined to, we can look into this a little deeper. This will outline a lot of the differences between Catholic scholasticism, mainstream Protestantism, and Calvinism/Evangelicalism.
Is it fair to assume that God provides more (intellect or grace) to those whom he likes best? If not, why was Satan, who was provided with the greatest intellect and outward beauty, deemed God’s favored creation? Alternately, why would God deprive his favored of the attributes most necessary to their salvation? If one might assume that God so provides, might not his lack of provision suggest that he does not care as greatly for animals of the lower orders? Would such not clearly suggest that God does not like dogs?
Oh dear… Of course not! We, as humans, have a tendency to always look at things in light of relativity. We look at patterns, sequences, classifications, structures, etc. in an attempt to simplify things so that we may understand it. We’re always thinking of things in relations to us. God’s love, however, cannot be simplified in light of our understanding. In this way, he perfectly loves each nature in a way that is proper to it.
I think I used “grace” (earlier) in a confusing context. Grace is a free gift. It comes from the latin word
gratia. This can mean many things-- including the possession of qualities, friendship with God etc. In terms of salvation, it is a free gift from God that, upon like free response, sanctifies the receiver more unto like Christ.
In terms of Lucifer, he was favored by God in the sense of his qualities. He was brilliant, he was beautiful, he was charismatic, etc. Before time, God had this idea of an angel named Lucifer. Lucifer, being an idea, was not inherently deserving of being himself with such qualities; all glory and honor is due to God. In this sense, Lucifer received the grace of such qualities. In relations to the other angels, we don’t know how much salvific grace he received; we at least know it was sufficient, in light of God’s benevolence.
