Typed this response in another thread wherein Calvinists were attempting to argue that since "rain falls on the just and the un-just"...that God "loves" everyone: I thought this response was warranted: Yes it does. And wiser men know that it would be more loving of God to simply never have created or breathed the breath of life into the poor damned wretch to begin with. It were certainly better for the pre-damned wretch for God NEVER to have CREATED THEM than that he possibly give them some 75+years of temporal Earthly "prosperity" only to condemn them to an infinite ETERNITY of torture. I'm pretty sure anyone would take the "just don't create me to begin with" option, if given a choice. B.T.W: Isn't this "rain shines on just and unjust" argument taxed a little more than it can pay? Lemme ask the Cal sycophants who are so addicted to this crack-rock of an argument a few questions: 1.) Do ALL of the condemned receive this "rain" or earthly blessing? I mean..do ALL of the "condemned" receive a "love" from God in terms of temporal Earthly prosperity? 2.) Aren't there MANY heathen condemned persons who ostensibly live their ENTIRE LIVES in squalor, poverty emotional and physical pain who go on to an eternity of hell and torment? 3.) Do you contend that ALL (heck even MOST) of the damned live lives of temporal happiness and success? 4.) If "the rain shines on the just and the un-just" don't the "monsoons" and "floods" and "tornadoes" and "hurricanes" do likewise? 5.) Does God protect the damned from natural disasters and famine and plague and war in a way such that they are "loved" by not ever having to experience them? 6.) Does the following scenario I am proposing NOT exist? a.) A young girl is born to impoverished parents in India in 900 a.d. b.) Her "father" is a vicious and perverted wretch who cares little for his wife or his own children c.) Her "father" divides his time between working, paying insurmountable debts and visiting with disease-ridden un-bathed prostitutes who have given him venereal diseases which he passed on to his wife years ago, purchasing opiates and alcohol to dull the misery and meaningless and pain of his existence, and occasionally molesting his 8-year old daughter who subsists on roughly a bowl of rice and some tepid water a day plus some aging and fouling fish once per week. d.) At the age of twelve her father dies, and she and her widowed mother (who statistically had 3 children die in infancy or before age 5) scrape out a living gathering refuse and weaving carpets and drapes for a nominal subsistence. e.) When our fortunate lass reaches the age of fifteen her mother dies of a combination of malnutrition, leprosy and the venereal diseases her "husband" passed onto her 15-years ago. f.) Our young lass (not knowing how else to eek out a meager existence) resorts to some form of prostitution in order survive..........(after all, she lost her virginity at age 7 to her father anyway no?) g.) She feels little or no guilt for her life-style since she was born (according to God's perfect [and quite loving] decree) a sinner who "wants" to do nothing but sin and hasn't heard the gospel or that anyone "loves" her (whatever the heck that means). h.) After 15 years of survival as a prostitute and at the ripe old age of 30 she shares a particular venereal disease with a man not unlike her own loving "father" who then passes that on to his OWN wife (but this is ancillary to our story). More importantly......at the age of thirty.....she is withered, sick, aged, broken-down, and looks like she is fifty or more, and cannot reasonably charge the 10 rupees she used to charge....(since there are too many 16-year olds commanding that price)......so she has to drop her price down to 5 rupees per encounter. I.) Eight years, 5 mis-carriages and one (now deceased) son who survived to the age of 4 later, she dies at the happy old age of 38..........sick and broken-down while bathing in the filthy waters of the Ganges River hoping to wash away her "sins" (whatever those are)........and she goes on to the GLORIOUS "loving" eternity of perpetual fires and punishment for her status as the "non-elect".....After all, she is indeed a "sinner" who "chose" to reject a God she's never heard of, thus, she must suffer eternally for having rejected him. Conclusion: Calvinists delude themselves with this scenario of prosperity pouring down on the damned. You can have the "rain on just and unjust" argument sure................as long as you include my (quite accurate) scenario along with it. I promise you, it's far more common than the billionaire play-boy scenario you imagine. As I stated earlier....................if my wife "loved" me in a similar manner as God as taught by Calvinism is a God who "loves"................................................. I'll pass on Calvinism "love", and just take the "don't create or 'love' me at all" option. Care to defend your scenario farther?