And universalism would be infinitely more just than extermination.

Wait i dont think the numbers add up?

The hell question is like eschatology. There are multiple views.

But the key thing for any Christian to remember is what NotReady said:

"the goal of life is to be conformed to the image of Christ, to overcome the evil nature we have and be transformed into the being God intended for us to be".

In the scriptures there is a soft/fuzzy lens on heaven/hell and on eschatology. The hard/full lens is on Jesus. Its quite obvious what people are suppose to be focusing on and it is Jesus not getting all reactionary on hell questions.

Hmmm, you're right. Divide my infinity by 2. That'll fix it.

But is universalism logically consistent with free will?

How bout letting people choose once they get there: free will (if it exists!) intact!

yes

Idk if freewill is logically consistent with itself. But i think the Univerlist say there is a type of purgatory firing of the soul until it is ready to come to God and all souls will come to God of their own freewill. Not sure about this though.

You said "Why would you pass the buck onto God?". I explained how many atheists aren't incorrigible. Buck is on God for those people. God is therefore unjust in sending them to eternal prison: which is the point I was making, and why really this incorrigible thing kind of has nothing to do with it.

How do you know they don't have a subconscious motivation?

Are people consciously aware of their motivations at all times?

The conscious people control but the subconscious is different.
Quote:
"If the Holy Spirit can take over the subconscious with our consent and cooperation, then we have almighty Power working at the basis of our lives, then we can do anything we ought to do, go anywhere we ought to go, and be anything we ought to be."
E. Stanley Jones

Wiki on the term subconscious:

In everyday speech and popular writing, however, the term is very commonly encountered as a layman's replacement for the unconscious mind, which in Freud's opinion is a repository for socially unacceptable ideas, wishes or desires, traumatic memories, and painful emotions put out of mind by the mechanism of psychological repression. However, the contents do not necessarily have to be solely negative.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Subconscious_mind

What does this have to do with anything were talking about? If they're not incorrigible they're not incorrigible, even if they have a subconscious.

I can't make it any plainer than Sartre, Lewis, Moreland, etc. If you really don't get it just tell God at the last judgment you didn't understand any of it, and good luck.

You're really reaching now.

Noone will disagree with God that they deserve Hell, since God is perfectly just and merciful.

They choose to go their themselves, and endure this separation. It's been suggested that if they were to actually go to heaven and be with God' face to face' that would cause them much more immense pain since God is holy and they are wicked... sort of why Catholics believe that most saved people go to purgatory to be purified as in a refiners fire.

Under this, we can see that Hell itself is merciful.

Well what could make someone incorrigible.

I said above people make the statement "It wouldn't have done any good."

Like they know something inside themselves is in opposition to doing the right thing. Since we have a subconscious where a lot of our issues reside its not farfetched to say that they could have an inner motive not fully revealed to them that prompts them to reject God's salvation offer. Some people couple this with being strong willed and/or with education.

Christians learn to submit out of meekness and humility. Not to become slaves but to put their wills in conformity with God's. God is the potter and he conforms our wills with his little by little through our co-operation with him. Because some Christians are so carnal and weak in studying the bible that they are unaware of this doesn't mean the phenomena doesn't occur.

People have in their arrogance chosen to appropriate arm chair psychology to tell Christians they are delusional when this phenomena I am referring to is all over Christian literature and traditions. People report the experience of conforming to God's will all the time. Indeed that is one of the main purposes of the Lord's Prayer to conform the world to God's will. "Thy kingdom come, thy will be done on earth as it is in heaven."

Just because the current generation is glued to television and video games instead of their bibles doesn't mean the phenonema doesn't still occur. Its just the untowardness of the generation confusing everyone. How do you build Christian character if no one pays attention to Christ where they come in contact with him most: the bible. I expect God will touch us again soon to start a revival unless of course we are the last generation then we will probably go to the dogs until Christ himself intervenes.

All philosophy does is lead you down a lot of rabbit holes where you focus on semantics and everything but yourself and conforming to God's will.

Of course you can contrast this with Nietzsche who seems to have a "will to power" philosophy. It is scary this will to self power he is encouraging because people have crazy-carnal minds. Look at Hitler and imagine all the crazy people like that reading Nietzsche and deciding to empower themselves. Trying to dictate to people is the will to power (a manifestation of the carnal mind that hasn't conformed with Christ's mind) gone insane.

What if you're not rejecting God but having an interpretation problem and that contributes to you failing to conform with him?

It's not a matter of making your previous comments "plainer"; it's a matter of addressing my actual question!

Again: how can I tell if a particular person (say, me) rejects God? How?! (You haven't said anything on this topic so far.)

(For clarity: I know how to tell if I reject Christianity, or Islam, or Shintoism, or Wicca. But no idea how to determine if I reject God.)

For example, God tells you to do something (in writing), and you don't do it.

Care to flesh out that hypothetical a bit?

With no additional criteria, I can use your example to assert anything from 'Everyone rejects to God', to 'Nobody rejects God'. Not exactly helpful, is it?

It is correct that everyone rejects God to some extent. That's called sin.

As for no one rejecting God also following from my statement, I'm not sure where you are getting that.

Your criteria is completely empty, since it offers no way of identifying written commands from God.

Hence I could consistently claim that all written commands are Divine; or that none are.

What? Let's try to proceed logically, shall we?

First, I am not attempting to tell you how to identify a written command from God, only that rejecting a written command from God constitutes a rejection of its source. An equivalent principle applies in the secular world, irrespective of whether you believe the entity issuing the law, ruling, etc even exists.

Second, the binding nature of a written command from God is not contingent on it supplying a means of verifying itself as such.

Evidently this is a tautology under your use of the relevant words. But it doesn't constitute even an attempt to answer my question. (If you recall, I asked: How can I tell if a particular person rejects God? Explicitly: in real life.)

And this helps me not at all.

Did you not read "If they're not incorrigible they're not incorrigible"? Babbling on about what could make someone incorrigible is a moot point now.

I want to be there when you try that with God, only not standing real close to you.