The Burning Bush Vol 9 No 2.pmd - Far Eastern Bible College

120
The Burning Bush 9/2 (July 2003)
the only begotten Son of God” (regardless of whether the opportunity
presents itself), for they “loved darkness rather than light.” John 3:36 says
that “the wrath of God abideth on him.” This is the wrath of God
mentioned earlier in Romans 1:18-21, because “when they knew God,
they glorified him not as God, neither were thankful.”
It is further emphasised in the following passages that God does not
have pleasure in seeing the wicked die.
Have I any pleasure at all that the wicked should die? saith the Lord GOD:
and not that he should return from his ways, and live? … For I have no
pleasure in the death of him that dieth, saith the Lord GOD: wherefore turn
yourselves, and live ye (Ezek 18:23, 32).
Say unto them, As I live, saith the Lord GOD, I have no pleasure in the
death of the wicked; but that the wicked turn from his way and live: turn
ye, turn ye from your evil ways; for why will ye die, O house of Israel?
(Ezel 33:11).
Who will have all men to be saved, and to come unto the knowledge of the
truth (1 Tim 2:4).
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 (2 Pet 3:9).
What if God, willing to shew his wrath, and to make his power known,
endured with much longsuffering the vessels of wrath fitted to destruction:
And that he might make known the riches of his glory on the vessels of
mercy, which he had afore prepared unto glory (Rom 9:22-23).
This is evidence that God is not responsible for the lost state of the
unsaved. Although He did not elect them to be saved, neither did He
deliberately “unelect” them to be unsaved. They were already lost and
deserved death when they disobeyed God in the Garden of Eden, Adam
being their representative. Therefore, they are fully responsible for their
own lost condition.
To conclude, the writer would like to use a simple analogy to
illustrate all the points discussed in this paper. Suppose there were 1000
criminals locked up in jail in a certain country. And on the country’s 50th independence day, the President decided to pardon 50 prisoners and set
them free. Now, the remaining 950 criminals still in prison have no right
to cry unfairness for they had indeed committed crimes worthy of
imprisonment. Neither should they have the right to question the
President why he chose those 50 and not them. The President is not