This is an excerpt from a letter to Anna-Beth telling her about a discussion I had with the college pastor of a local church. It was nice to hash things out after spending so much time in the word. Even if I’m wrong on many of these points it only helps to talk to people about these things.

“The pastor talked about the purpose of Christ’s salvation. He made a comment, however, that made me raise an eyebrow. He conjectured that without the law we would be unable to glorify God and therefore neutral. I disagreed because I believe that without the law we would be unable to glorify God and therefore wicked. We had an interesting discussion about spiritual neutrality and I’ll give you some basics here. He argued that animals, who cannot glorify God, are not punished for their wickedness and are neutral. I argued that animals have no souls but bear the burden of our curse on earth and are wicked because of our actions. He argued that the law had always existed as a means to glorify God. I argued that was correct but without those means we wouldn’t be neutral we would be wicked. Even without the law we either exist as God desires or as God doesn’t and without knowing what God desires we live as he doesn’t not in some middle-ground and would be punished in the same way. To me, if we say we can be neutral we deny that God exists, God didn’t create the standard of perfection he is the standard of perfection. People are either with God or not. To say there’s a third option denies God’s absolute nature. So…long story short…I argued that neutrality is only applicable if there is either no God or God is not absolute. Then we got into another interesting tangent (a third person came up) and argued that neutrality is not being given a choice (ie the 1000 year peaceful reign before Satan is released). The pastor and I argued the same point from different views. I argued that because God is outside of time and has foreknowledge that the choice they are making will happen, is happening, and has happened for him so there is no one who does not have a choice. The pastor took the approach that choice is irrelevant and cited Romans and how God chooses people to understand his message of salvation. That people will hear and not go to heaven does not decrease God’s mercy but increases it. God is praised in eternity through the enaction of his justice (hell) and mercy (heaven). And if God’s justice is being enacted in hell than it is a right end for all who go there. People who say this is unfair Paul says “Who are you to talk back to God?”

This is a scary thought, in believing this we must accept that God could send anyone to hell he desires regardless of what they want. The answer, its Biblical. So that was an interesting evening, I think I’ll go back next Sunday but keep shopping for churches on Sunday morning. There is something very valuable about taking my theological study (currently in Hosea, Psalms, Proverbs, and Luke) and hashing out points with other believers.”

As an addendum to the end of this I think that in the absense of the law we can be created in perfect unity with God as well. That would be the state of creation before God gave commandments to us. Creation was neither inherently wicked or neutral after being created before the command was given so my idea needs modification. I affirm that there is no such thing as spiritual neutrality, but deny that without a given law we are innately wicked. God decides where we go in that case.