# Mercy and Justice



## ainigmati (Aug 21, 2013)

Briefly, 
Is God as equally inclined toward showing His mercy as He is inclined toward meting out His justice?


----------



## InSlaveryToChrist (Aug 21, 2013)

I wonder why you want to know such a thing, considering it should have no impact on our view of God. God is both of these in His nature, and He is free to demonstrate both in measures best fit for His greatest self-glorification. And the way things are right now IS the best harmony between mercy and justice.


----------



## Miss Marple (Aug 21, 2013)

I see the perfect illustration of this on the cross. Perfect mercy in Christ's sacrifice. Perfect justice in his sacrifice, as well.


----------



## a mere housewife (Aug 21, 2013)

Exodus 34:5-7: when God reveals His own name, the abundant emphasis is on His mercy.


----------



## Phil D. (Aug 21, 2013)

God delights to show mercy (Micah 7:18), while not so with meeting out punishment (Ezek. 18:23, 32; 33:11).


----------



## InSlaveryToChrist (Aug 21, 2013)

Phil D. said:


> God delights to show mercy (Micah 7:18), while not so with meeting out punishment (Ezek. 18:23, 32; 33:11).



There are numerous passages in the Bible where God delights in doing justice to the wicked. But most notably of all, it pleased the Father to bruise Christ (Isaiah 53:10). That is because it is for God's glory. But it is equally true that God does not take pleasure in the death of the wicked, meaning, God does not delight in that end itself.


----------



## ainigmati (Aug 21, 2013)

InSlaveryToChrist said:


> I wonder why you want to know such a thing, considering it should have no impact on our view of God.


Thanks for the reply. I'll try to answer your question the best I can. ( by trade I am NOT a scholar or theologian. Just an aging automobile mechanic). God is essentially pure in all his attributes He is not a mixture like we are. All His attributes are equal. . Therefore he cannot be more merciful than he is just. We had a guest pastor last Lord's Day evening who said that God's mercy comes from his heart and his justice from his hand. As a restored backslider His attribute of mercy is very dear to my heart.


----------



## Cymro (Aug 22, 2013)

"Justice and judgment of Thy throne 
are made the dwelling place;
Mercy, accompany'd with truth,
shall go before Thy face."


----------



## InSlaveryToChrist (Aug 22, 2013)

ainigmati said:


> InSlaveryToChrist said:
> 
> 
> > I wonder why you want to know such a thing, considering it should have no impact on our view of God.
> ...



Ok, I noticed there is a theological misunderstanding in the application of these terms (mercy and justice) to God. God is always TRULY just and merciful to sinners. And He is COMPLETELY just to all (in the end, He does not leave any sin unpunished). However, He is COMPLETELY merciful only to the elect.

So, by simple math God would seem to do more justice than mercy to sinners. But who cares about the measures? The main importance is that justice and mercy are both acceptable and wonderful aspects of God.


----------



## a mere housewife (Aug 22, 2013)

It is not strict justice to accept a sacrifice in place of someone else's sin. That is a sheer 'leap' (if one can speak so) across the chasm of God's holiness and our sins, of mercy. I remember reading this point a couple years ago in Ursinus' Commentary on the Heidelberg catechism and asking about it here, but I can't remember where that is located right now. However, I can look it up if need be.

The most intense revelation of God's mercy is also the most intense revelation of His justice (the cross). God did not divorce them. But revealing Himself to us at all is an act of mercy, and the revelation He makes is of Himself as first, second, and third, 'merciful and gracious, slow to anger, and abounding in steadfast love.' 

(edit: Mercy and justice are not divorced in these verses either. But I think that if we aren't riveted on the mercy, either here or on the cross, as the 'focus' God is drawing our eyes to -- we are almost missing the 'point' of the justice?)



> As a restored backslider His attribute of mercy is very dear to my heart.


As someone who sins daily, it is dear to mine, too.


----------



## a mere housewife (Aug 22, 2013)

PS. Here is the link to that discussion, if it is of interest : http://www.puritanboard.com/f15/question-about-ursinus-gods-mercy-reprobate-56611/

Also note the Commentary on the Heidelberg Catechism on 'The Doctrine of the Holy Trinity', II, at the paragraph elucidating that God is _'Just.'_ -- the last sentence in the paragraph: 'He does not however, give to any one his just desert.' I was quite troubled by such statements the first time I read them. I had grown up thinking of God's justice as absolutely unmitigated, and mercy as only existing like a faint light along a slender margin to give things a blacker and more awful emphasis.


----------



## InSlaveryToChrist (Aug 22, 2013)

a mere housewife said:


> It is not strict justice to accept a sacrifice in place of someone else's sin. That is a sheer 'leap' (if one can speak so) across the chasm of God's holiness and our sins, of mercy. I remember reading this point a couple years ago in Ursinus' Commentary on the Heidelberg catechism and asking about it here, but I can't remember where that is located right now. However, I can look it up if need be.
> 
> The most intense revelation of God's mercy is also the most intense revelation of His justice (the cross). God did not divorce them. But revealing Himself to us at all is an act of mercy, and the revelation He makes is of Himself as first, second, and third, 'merciful and gracious, slow to anger, and abounding in steadfast love.'
> 
> (edit: Mercy and justice are not divorced in these verses either. But I think that if we aren't riveted on the mercy, either here or on the cross, as the 'focus' God is drawing our eyes to -- we are almost missing the 'point' of the justice?)



Heidi,

I think it is, indeed, true that justice is there to magnify God's mercy. Romans 9:22-23 gives a threefold explanation for God's justice: to "shew his wrath," to "make his power known" and to "make known the riches of His glory on the vessels of mercy." Considering the order of these reasons, here the climax point seems to be God's mercy.

In light of this, should we think God's mercy is more glorious than His justice (or any attribute of God for that matter). Of course they are different aspects of God for different purposes, but can we say one aspect of God is more glorious than the other; one higher, the other lesser?

There is no question every attribute is necessary and important for the manifestation of each other, but if we think in terms of what we, as creatures, should value most about God, would it be love? Or am I falling into the error of cutting God's nature into individual pieces?


----------



## a mere housewife (Aug 22, 2013)

Samuel, that is a beautiful point from Romans 9, thank you.

In that the saints know God better than the lost, and their praise of Him is more complete -- I think we can say (speaking not as a theologian, but a housewife who has been rescued by it) that He is even more magnified in His mercy than in His justice?


----------



## InSlaveryToChrist (Aug 22, 2013)

a mere housewife said:


> Samuel, that is a beautiful point from Romans 9, thank you.
> 
> In that the saints know God better than the lost, and their praise of Him is more complete -- I think we can say (speaking not as a theologian, but a housewife who has been rescued by it) that He is even more magnified in His mercy than in His justice?



But don't the saints also know God's justice more? The very knowledge of God's love gives us eyes to see the depth of our sin, whereas the reprobate in hell is confused and ever angry against God in his heart.


----------



## earl40 (Aug 22, 2013)

InSlaveryToChrist said:


> There are numerous passages in the Bible where God delights in doing justice to the wicked. But most notably of all, it pleased the Father to bruise Christ (Isaiah 53:10). That is because it is for God's glory. But it is equally true that God does not take pleasure in the death of the wicked, meaning, God does not delight in that end itself.



In that end itself?

III. God, in His ordinary providence, makes use of means,[10] yet is free to work without,[11] above,[12] and against them,[13] *at His pleasure.*


----------



## a mere housewife (Aug 22, 2013)

InSlaveryToChrist said:


> But don't the saints also know God's justice more?



I think that's true too.

It's hard because in this creaturely experience we seem to be juxtaposing things that are not (as pointed out earlier) really 'at odds' in God. His mercy is just and his justice is merciful. Yet Scripture understands our experiental sense of a juxtaposition, of being subject to justice (necessarily in the form of wrath) or to mercy -- and addresses us in it; and for myself, I am constantly returning to the verse in Psalm 13: 'But I have trusted in thy mercy.'

A few things to especially consider might be the meaning of 'mercy rejoiceth against judgment', and the existence of hope in Lamentations 3. Ruben just forwarded an old email to me, from when I had been reading that chapter a few months ago:

I just realised something utterly wonderful -- the contrast in Lamentations 3 between what is 'from the heart' and enduring in God, and what is temporary, 'not willingly' -- in response to an outward cause:

'The steadfast love of the LORD never ceases, his mercies never come to an end; they are new every morning; great is thy faithfulness.'
vs
'For the Lord will not cast off for ever, but, though he cause grief, he will have compassion according to the abundance of his steadfast love; for he does not willingly afflict or grieve the sons of men.'

'Therefore have I hope​.​'


----------



## InSlaveryToChrist (Aug 22, 2013)

earl40 said:


> InSlaveryToChrist said:
> 
> 
> > There are numerous passages in the Bible where God delights in doing justice to the wicked. But most notably of all, it pleased the Father to bruise Christ (Isaiah 53:10). That is because it is for God's glory. But it is equally true that God does not take pleasure in the death of the wicked, meaning, God does not delight in that end itself.
> ...



In the end of the death of the wicked.


----------



## earl40 (Aug 22, 2013)

InSlaveryToChrist said:


> earl40 said:
> 
> 
> > InSlaveryToChrist said:
> ...



Have you read this yet?

Murray on the Free Offer: A Review by Matthew Winzer


----------



## InSlaveryToChrist (Aug 22, 2013)

a mere housewife said:


> His mercy is just and his justice is merciful.



Heidi,

Are you of the opinion that God's justice is merciful in hell, as well? I don't see that idea as Biblical, because God certainly won't hold back a single drop of the cup of God's wrath on the last day, because God's justice must be satisfied. On the other hand, the Bible would suggest that there are different levels of sin, and consequently different levels of punishment in the lake of fire, which would mean the cup of God's wrath is different for different persons (as in Psalms 11:5-6). The Bible does use a general term, "the cup of the Lord's wrath," but in light of the fact that every person is punished for Adam's first sin and his/her own sins, the amount of wrath poured on that person is dependent on those sins. God only satisfies His justice in regards to each individual sinner, nothing more, nothing less.


----------



## InSlaveryToChrist (Aug 22, 2013)

earl40 said:


> InSlaveryToChrist said:
> 
> 
> > earl40 said:
> ...



Yes, many times. What is the problem?


----------



## a mere housewife (Aug 22, 2013)

Samuel, the quote from Ursinus above may be relevant: even in eternity, God 'does not give to any one his just desert.' I am not sure that 'mercy' in hell is the right term, but we have had this discussion on the board many times: God is _good_ to the creature even in hell in that the creature has being, and being is a good. I'm not going to reargue that one, if that's okay . I find the suggestion that being itself could be an evil rather upsetting. It isn't a theory in isolation from serious repercussions that end in despair.

The point is that from our perspective the attributes are different; but we are speaking out of our limitations. God is simple. He is not two parts mercy and one part justice, or vice versa; trying to compound Him into parts via the attributes, to figure out how to add up those parts is, I think, to take the valid aspects of our limited perspective too absolutely.

What we know of Him from His own self revelation, is that those who hope in His mercy and see even His justice around this focal point, who exist to the praise of the glory of His *grace*, know and praise and love Him best. 

I will leave my own answer there -- I'm not brilliant enough to explain some of the knottier aspects of this, and don't wish to speak wrongly of God in any way. But it is sincerely good to talk to you about it. I pray you are well .


----------



## earl40 (Aug 22, 2013)

InSlaveryToChrist said:


> earl40 said:
> 
> 
> > InSlaveryToChrist said:
> ...



I assume you quoted Ezekiel (correct me if I am wrong) that God is speaking of the wicked who end up in hell.

"But it is equally true that God does not take pleasure in the death of the wicked"

The review posted speaks against such an interpretation.


----------



## ainigmati (Aug 22, 2013)

a mere housewife said:


> InSlaveryToChrist said:
> 
> 
> > But don't the saints also know God's justice more?
> ...



That text from Lamentations 3 was the text of the sermon preached last Lord's Day. I love the communion of the saints! (also the saints of the communion)


----------



## InSlaveryToChrist (Aug 22, 2013)

earl40 said:


> InSlaveryToChrist said:
> 
> 
> > earl40 said:
> ...



Oh, I'm sorry I used the phrase out of context! It was unintentional. It just happens that when an Arminian starts to argue on this text on God's will in regards to sinners, I usually start from hypothetically admitting their view of Ezekiel's passage and then show them, by referring to Lamentations 3, that God does not grieve the son of man willingly (from His heart -- i.e. for the mere end of grieving them), but only as a means to glorify Himself. Ezekiel is difficult to explain to the Arminian when there is a lot of work to do on the context before we can get to the heart of the matter. But you are absolutely right, this text should not be used as a defence for God's will in regards to the sinner's death.


----------



## Jake (Aug 22, 2013)

This came to mind... " Mercy triumphs over judgment." (James 2:13b, ESV)


----------



## earl40 (Aug 22, 2013)

InSlaveryToChrist said:


> Oh, I'm sorry I used the phrase out of context! It was unintentional. It just happens that when an Arminian starts to argue on this text on God's will in regards to sinners, I usually start from hypothetically admitting their view of Ezekiel's passage and then show them, by referring to Lamentations 3, that God does not grieve the son of man willingly (from His heart -- i.e. for the mere end of grieving them), but only as a means to glorify Himself. Ezekiel is difficult to explain to the Arminian when there is a lot of work to do on the context before we can get to the heart of the matter. But you are absolutely right, this text should not be used as a defence for God's will in regards to the sinner's death.



Is not Lamentations the speaking of His children?


----------



## InSlaveryToChrist (Aug 22, 2013)

earl40 said:


> InSlaveryToChrist said:
> 
> 
> > Oh, I'm sorry I used the phrase out of context! It was unintentional. It just happens that when an Arminian starts to argue on this text on God's will in regards to sinners, I usually start from hypothetically admitting their view of Ezekiel's passage and then show them, by referring to Lamentations 3, that God does not grieve the son of man willingly (from His heart -- i.e. for the mere end of grieving them), but only as a means to glorify Himself. Ezekiel is difficult to explain to the Arminian when there is a lot of work to do on the context before we can get to the heart of the matter. But you are absolutely right, this text should not be used as a defence for God's will in regards to the sinner's death.
> ...



Yes, the context would imply that. So, we cannot use this passage in regards to the reprobate (as I've wrongly done).

However, that is not a problem, since the torment of any creature is obviously an empty end for godly delight. God cannot delight in anything that does not reflect Himself, He ultimately delights in Himself. When God torments the wicked, His justice (and even His mercy) is being glorified in that torment, the torment being simply an empty instrument of God's glorification.


----------



## earl40 (Aug 23, 2013)

InSlaveryToChrist said:


> earl40 said:
> 
> 
> > InSlaveryToChrist said:
> ...



I do believe God is eternally just and the expression of His justice by His wrathful action does please Him. Granted His attribute of being just was never manifested before creation.

III. God, in His ordinary providence, makes use of means,[10] yet is free to work without,[11] above,[12] and against them,[13] at His pleasure.

The above also includes the just punishment of those in hell.


----------



## InSlaveryToChrist (Aug 23, 2013)

earl40 said:


> InSlaveryToChrist said:
> 
> 
> > earl40 said:
> ...



And it also includes sin. So, what you are implying is that God delights in the mere suffering of creatures, and He also delights in their sinning. I think you are not interpreting the quote properly, and I personally don't see it saying anything else but that God uses means at His pleasure -- nothing is said about the REASON why the use of those means pleases Him.


----------



## earl40 (Aug 23, 2013)

InSlaveryToChrist said:


> earl40 said:
> 
> 
> > InSlaveryToChrist said:
> ...



I do not want to make the mistake to insinuate that God takes any real "delight" in punishing sinners in hell as if it is a human emotion. To do so would assign a human trait that God does not posses. Though I do believe He is pleased to met out wrath to those in hell as He desires. How can God do anything that is not desirable unto Himself?


----------



## earl40 (Aug 23, 2013)

Think of mercy and wrath as being expressions of God toward creation which are out workings of His eternal righteousness and love. There is nothing God does that does not please Himself.


----------



## InSlaveryToChrist (Aug 23, 2013)

earl40 said:


> Think of mercy and wrath as being expressions of God toward creation which are out workings of His eternal righteousness and love. There is nothing God does that does not please Himself.



And I agree with that! The only objection I am raising here, is the REASON why everything pleases Him, and that REASON is not found in things themselves.


----------



## KMK (Aug 23, 2013)

It might be helpful to keep in mind Rom 1:16-18. God's justice is revealed in general revelation while His mercy is revealed in special revelation. There is no need for special revelation (God's Word) to establish justice since it has already been revealed in the natural world. On the flip side, God's Word would necessarily focus on establishing God's mercy. This does not imply that God loves one His attributes more than another.


----------



## earl40 (Aug 23, 2013)

InSlaveryToChrist said:


> earl40 said:
> 
> 
> > Think of mercy and wrath as being expressions of God toward creation which are out workings of His eternal righteousness and love. There is nothing God does that does not please Himself.
> ...



I am not sure of this because the reason He punishes sinners is because they are sinners in themselves.


----------



## InSlaveryToChrist (Aug 23, 2013)

earl40 said:


> InSlaveryToChrist said:
> 
> 
> > earl40 said:
> ...



The further reason for that is because sinners contradict God's law, and God is holy in His justice.

You see, everything leads back to God. The reason for everything God does comes back to who He is.


----------



## InSlaveryToChrist (Aug 23, 2013)

Earl,

I don't believe God's good pleasure is the ultimate reason for His actions, but that this good pleasure is in accordance to His nature which is the ultimate reason both to His good pleasure and His will and actions that follow that pleasure. I think it is Biblical to say the nature of a person determines his/her desire, and desire will, and will action.


----------



## earl40 (Aug 23, 2013)

InSlaveryToChrist said:


> Earl,
> 
> I don't believe God's good pleasure is the ultimate reason for His actions, but that this good pleasure is in accordance to His nature which is the ultimate reason both to His good pleasure and His will and actions that follow that pleasure. I think it is Biblical to say the nature of a person determines his/her desire, and desire will, and will action.



I agree this this comes down to His nature. Was God not eternally just before He created creatures? Was he not eternally loving before creation? Now of course God did not express mercy or justice "before" creation because there was no fallen creature to express mercy or justice towards. His expression of mercy and wrath are expressions of His nature which are pleasing to Him, and those expressions are pleasing to Himself which of course arise from his nature.


----------



## InSlaveryToChrist (Aug 24, 2013)

earl40 said:


> InSlaveryToChrist said:
> 
> 
> > Earl,
> ...



Earl,

I think I now understand what the problem was. As you said, "mercy and wrath are expressions of His nature," however, this does not mean the RESULT of those expressions is pleasing to Himself IN AND OF ITSELF. The suffering of a person is meaningless and without value _in and of itself_, and so is the salvation of a person from God's wrath. As a key point here, everything needs to be linked to God to have meaning and value.


----------



## earl40 (Aug 24, 2013)

InSlaveryToChrist said:


> Earl,
> 
> I think I now understand what the problem was. As you said, "mercy and wrath are expressions of His nature," however, this does not mean the RESULT of those expressions is pleasing to Himself IN AND OF ITSELF. The suffering of a person is meaningless and without value _in and of itself_, and so is the salvation of a person from God's wrath. As a key point here, everything needs to be linked to God to have meaning and value.



Overall I think we agree in that the wrath God exhibits to the reprobate in hell flow from His nature, and that the meaning and value of that wrath _do have value _"in and of itself" to demonstrate His just nature and how He was merciful to us before glory. For I have no doubt that we will see God demonstrating His wrath before our eyes forever.


----------



## InSlaveryToChrist (Aug 24, 2013)

earl40 said:


> InSlaveryToChrist said:
> 
> 
> > Earl,
> ...



NONONONO! You're not getting what I'm saying. God's WRATH is good in and of itself, BUT the RESULT of that, i.e. the suffering of a person is not. You see?


----------



## earl40 (Aug 24, 2013)

InSlaveryToChrist said:


> earl40 said:
> 
> 
> > InSlaveryToChrist said:
> ...



The suffering is indeed bad and not good for them in hell, but good for us and God. Sorry if I don't understand if you are making a different point I am conveying. I simply just don't see it.


----------



## InSlaveryToChrist (Aug 24, 2013)

earl40 said:


> InSlaveryToChrist said:
> 
> 
> > earl40 said:
> ...



Don't you see how you just gave the suffering A GOOD REASON? But aside from any _external_ reason, _in and of itself_, the suffering is meaningless.


----------



## earl40 (Aug 24, 2013)

InSlaveryToChrist said:


> Don't you see how you just gave the suffering A GOOD REASON? But aside from any _external_ reason, _in and of itself_, the suffering is meaningless.



I guess I can almost see what you are saying. I can not see how any suffering can happen apart from anything _in and of itself._ Suffering is not a thing that stands alone but a reaction to outside forces. Sorry I must just be dense or something.


----------



## InSlaveryToChrist (Aug 24, 2013)

earl40 said:


> InSlaveryToChrist said:
> 
> 
> > Don't you see how you just gave the suffering A GOOD REASON? But aside from any _external_ reason, _in and of itself_, the suffering is meaningless.
> ...



I was not arguing how suffering can happen in and of itself, but how it has no meaning and value IF it is not somehow linked to God. All THINGS are the same. Anything created by God, whether by immediate or secondary cause (like sin), has to derive its meaning from its Creator. If we start with suffering, there is literally NOTHING; no meaning, no value; just plain suffering. But if we link this suffering to God, to give it a purpose for its existence, we begin to see why God would delight in it (or any other thing for that matter). As I said before, God only delights in Himself _ultimately_, and any THING He delights in, He delights in because it somehow reflects His own glory. God is not just everything to US, He is also everything to HIMSELF.


----------



## earl40 (Aug 24, 2013)

InSlaveryToChrist said:


> I was not arguing how suffering can happen in and of itself, but how it has no meaning and value IF it is not somehow linked to God. All THINGS are the same. Anything created by God, whether by immediate or secondary cause (like sin), has to derive its meaning from its Creator. If we start with suffering, there is literally NOTHING; no meaning, no value; just plain suffering. But if we link this suffering to God, to give it a purpose for its existence, we begin to see why God would delight in it (or any other thing for that matter). As I said before, God only delights in Himself _ultimately_, and any THING He delights in, He delights in because it somehow reflects His own glory. God is not just everything to US, He is also everything to HIMSELF.



I see we both agree that God delights in manifesting His justice, and we only can understand this if we see He is the ultimate cause of all that passes which will glorify Himself. I also can now see IF the suffering was not connected to God it simply is impossible to be something, In other words, an impossible situation. For God is the ultimate cause of all that passes, and His pleasure is derived from His own attributes.


----------



## InSlaveryToChrist (Aug 24, 2013)

earl40 said:


> For God is the ultimate cause of all that passes, and His pleasure is derived from His own attributes.



Yes. And if we apply suffering to this picture, we can say, His pleasure of suffering is derived from His own attributes. This sentence, of course, is not to be understood as if the pleasure of suffering was something _inherent_ to God's nature, but that He has pleasure in the particular cases of suffering He has _freely_ decreed in eternity.


----------



## earl40 (Aug 25, 2013)

InSlaveryToChrist said:


> earl40 said:
> 
> 
> > For God is the ultimate cause of all that passes, and His pleasure is derived from His own attributes.
> ...


----------

