Sunday: Running Away
Jonah was an amazingly successful missionary. At the same time, he was also a very reluctant one, at least at first. Whatever Jonah was doing, God’s call interrupted his life in a big way. Instead of taking God’s yoke upon his shoulders and discovering for himself that His yoke is easy and His burden light (Matthew 11:30), Jonah decided to find his own “rest,” and that was by running in the opposite direction from where God was calling him to go.
Where was Jonah hoping to find peace and rest from God’s call? How well did it work for him? Read Jonah 1:1-1:16.
Image © Kim Justinen from GoodSalt.com
Jonah sets off in the opposite direction to where God called Him. He doesn’t even stop to reason with God, as had many of the other Bible prophets when called to be God’s messengers (see, for example, Exodus 4:13).
Interestingly enough, this is not the first time that Jonah has been called to speak for God, as suggested by 2 Kings 14:25. In that case, however, Jonah appears to have done what the Lord had asked him to. Not this time, however.
Why?
Historical and archaeological records document the cruelty of the Neo-Assyrian overlords who dominated the ancient Near East during the eighth century B.C., the time that Jonah ministered in Israel. About 75 years later, the Neo-Assyrian king Sennacherib attacked Judah. Israel and Samaria already had fallen about twenty years earlier, and King Hezekiah apparently had joined a local anti-Assyrian coalition.
Now the time had come for the Assyrians to settle accounts. The Bible (2 Kings 18, Isaiah 36), historical Assyrian documents, and the wall reliefs of Sennacherib’s palace in Nineveh all tell us the cruel story about the fall of Lachish, one of the most important and well-fortified southern border fortresses of Hezekiah. In one inscription, Sennacherib claims to have taken more than two hundred thousand prisoners from 46 fortified cities that he claimed to have destroyed. When the Assyrian king took Lachish, hundreds or thousands of prisoners were impaled; hard-core supporters of King Hezekiah were flayed alive, while the rest were sent to Assyria as cheap slave labor.
The Assyrians could be incredibly cruel, even by the standards of the world at that time. And God was sending Jonah into the very heart of that empire?
Is it any wonder that Jonah didn’t want to go?
| Fleeing from God? Have you ever done that before? If so, how well did it work out for you? What lessons should you have learned from that mistake? |
(26)
This has nothing to do with this weeks lesson, but I cannot let the moment pass without reflecting a little.
Twenty years ago, in the middle of the night, I was studying in the peace and quiet when my computer pinged and I noted that I had received an email from one of my Sabbath School Net friends. Her email did not make sense to me; something about her policeman husband being called up for duty at short notice. I replied that I did not know what she was talking about. She told me to go and switch on my TV, any channel, and I would understand. I did so, and even then, it took several minutes for me to realise that I was not watching a movie. In real-time I saw the second plane hit the tower. And then I knew, it wasn't fiction. I woke Carmel up and told her to come and watch. "The world had changed".
Twenty years ago today! Have we come to the stage of just accepting it? Or has our Christianity been challenged into making the world a better place just where we are? Have we just capitalised on a doomsday - fulfilment of prophecy message or have we sensed the need of offering hope and encouragement to people now. Twenty years on; it's time to reflect, not about the evil in the world but about our opportunity to share the light of loving Christians to those who see no hope.
Perhaps there is a direct link between September 11 2001 and today's lesson... and that link may be God's 'attitude/orientation' towards those who commit atrocities.
The description of the documented cruelty carried out during the fall of Lachish and the cruelty that happened in the course of the fall of the twin towers is - in principle - not dissimilar.
While the human desire in situations like this is revenge - or at the very least tinged by an underpinning desire to either 'make them pay' or the softer version of see them 'get what they deserve' - God's desire is that those who "don't know their right hand from their left" be given an opportunity for salvation.
Human ways in response to those who commit atrocities are typically motivated by a desire for revenge. But God's higher ways (Isaiah 55:8,9) are motivated by His abundant compassion for the person behind the atrocity they committed (Jonah 4:2,11). Humans pursue 'justice' via infliction of punishment in an attempt to supposedly 'settle the score'. God pursues a higher justice that seeks actual restoration back to righteousness via healing and restoring hearts and minds of broken people - including perpetrators.
In this context, I would affirm Maurice's statement that it is perhaps time to reflect on the opportunities that currently exist to know and share the light of loving God whose heart towards even those who commit atrocities is compassion rather than revenge.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
PS: So I am not misunderstood, I am not saying there will be no consequences to those who do not take up God's compassionate offer of salvation-restoration. There will be - for sin destroys all who cling to it. But it will be the inherent nature and character of sin that will do the destroying, not God. God, in mind-blowingly abundant compassionate mercy and grace, is currently temporarily restraining the full consequences of the inherent wages of sin (2 Thessalonians 2:5-10; Revelation 7:1; Deuteronomy 30:15-20; Romans 6:23) to provide an opportunity for salvation-restoration. But when each person has set their heart either for good (beneficence) or evil (maleficence), then those presently restrained consequences will finally be released and the full force of their destructiveness and destruction will finally be unleashed (as per Revelation 22:11,12). God will actively release what is currently being actively restrained, but it is the inherent destructive nature of sin that will be the active 'causative-agent' of the ensuing destruction - not God. This is the light we have to share with the world.
I believe that you have stated it rather well, Phil, The inherent nature of sin is what makes it good and necessary for God to actively mete out its just recompense on the finally impenitent, as out-of-character ("strange") as it may seem for Him to do that. The alternative would be to leave sinners alone to slowly destroy themselves and each other -- something that would be truly out of character for a compassionate God. Then there is the matter of placing the universe on a basis of eternal security. It will be awesome to eventually see how He did it!
Hi R.G.
I would not say that God "metes out" just recompense as much as He releases the restraint He was previously enacting and it is the inherent nature of sin (ie lawless [Greek: anomia] chaos that promotes destruction) that is then unleashed. God's strange act, His disturbing work (Isaiah 28:21) is to release the finally impenitent to destruction. It is 'strange' because God's desire/will is that none perish but that all come to repentance and therefore God's initiatives are aimed at doing everything possible to advance that possibility. To cease from doing that and let people go to their own choice is strange/foreign to God's 'orientation' to abundant life.
Sinners only destroy themselves slowly because God is presently temporarily restraining the full consequences of sin from being released. When God finally releases all restraint, the ensuing destruction will not be slow - all hell will be unleashed, so to speak (as per 2 Peter 3:10-12).
Hi, Phil. I believe you are mistaken on this point. The entire work of judging that the redeemed are to do, in union with Christ, during the thousand years, is to determine how much punishment each lost soul must endure, before being allowed to sink into eternal oblivion, in order for justice to be satisfied. It follows that the resulting sentence will indeed be "meted out." Why say otherwise? Would a "meting out" of true justice be contrary to God's character? Would such an act of God be more "cruel" than just leaving the lost to a "karma" that doesn't really exist? Sin is inherently evil, but I see no reason to think that it is capable of meting out perfect justice.
I believe Shirley is right. The wicked destroy themselves only in the sense that their choices make God's active role in their punishment and destruction absolutely right, necessary, and inevitable -- even merciful. See Revelation 16:5-6. This passage is an illustration of how God's character will be vindicated. There will be an overwhelming sense that all of His decisions have been absolutely right, just, and perfect. It will have nothing to do with silly distinctions between active and passive roles.
R.G. Thank you for your explanation from the Word of the LORD.
I believe the LORD gives us a choice to either live in harmony with His Principles or not, however His Word is clear that after this time of probation He will destroy all those who reject Him and His Principles. He either gives or removes His gift of Life.
In the history of the children of Israel we see various instances where in anticipation of the final judgment the LORD destroys individuals or groups of people that reject His authority.
Gen 19:24-25k
24 Then the LORD rained brimstone and fire on Sodom and Gomorrah, from the LORD out of the heavens. 25 So He destroyed those cities, all the plain, all the inhabitants of the cities, and what grew on the ground.
We read in Rev 19:9 of the final end of the wicked
They went up on the breadth of the earth and surrounded the camp of the saints and the beloved city. And fire came down from God out of heaven and devoured them.
That is the Bad News, but the Good News is that the LORD is doing everything possible to get everyone to choose Him, He doesn't want anyone to be destroyed, He wants everyone to repent and be part of His loving Kingdom.
2Peter 3:8-13, Ex 34:6-7
We also see this in the story of Jonah and the city of Nineveh, the message was be destroyed or repent. They believed and repented, I believe - do you?
I don't look forward to that task. I would not want anyone to suffer 1 nanosecond longer than absolutely necessary. There is a paper by J Paul Grove that gives a helpful perspective on the second death including how Christ experienced it. Alas, I don't know where to find it.
I hear you, Dana. I believe that is exactly how we are going to approach the task, in union with Christ, seeing how little can be meted out and still satisfy justice. To my mind, the examination of cases that this will entail will have the effect of bringing closure to the catastrophe that is the sin experiment. Also, giving such heavy responsibilities to the humble (and such power over their proud and wicked oppressors) is God's way of honouring them before the universe.
Hi R.G.
If I am understanding you correctly, according to what you have outlined, God's "true justice" is about making sure that each unrepentant person has endured the required amount of punishment/suffering before finally being allowed to sink into eternal oblivion. Thus, justice requires the right amount of infliction of suffering in order to be satisfied - and therefore that God and the righteous somehow are 'satisfied' by such taking place and not until such takes place. The fact that sin has been eliminated would therefore not of itself be sufficient justice because the right amount of suffering was meted out in the process.
In principle, that the 'guilty' must in turn receive the right amount of inflicted punishment (ie in proportion to the amount of suffering they inflicted upon others) is the basis of human justice - which is essentially the principle of eye for an eye and tooth for tooth (Matthew 5:38). If this is indeed what God's ultimate "true justice" is and that this is part of His higher ways (Isaiah 55:8,9), then I should also see this demonstrated consistently across Jesus life and teachings while He was on earth revealing all aspects of the nature and character of God (John 17:4,6,26).
If I am mistaken, I will be the first to admit it.
Hi, Phil. If you are mistaken, I suspect that your error might lie in the tendency to set justice and mercy in opposition to each other. If, as the Bible claims, they met (even kissed each other) at the cross, then it follows that God's character is able to hold both justice and mercy, uncompromised, as equal components of His love. As a practical matter, we might reasonably expect that there is a time for the one to be primarily manifested, and a time in God's wisdom for the other.
Whatever our past experience with miscarried justice or vindictive vengeance, true justice is nevertheless a real thing. You and I are bound to eventually see what it means, presumably as sorrowful spectators, by God's grace. God's extreme reluctance to give the sinner up to the full consequences of his or her choices is a reflection of just how bad those consequences will be. Yes, I wholeheartedly agree with you that those consequences will be natural and inevitable, if not necessarily automatic in their execution.
I object to the thought that God and the redeemed must enjoy a feeling of "satisfaction" at the suffering of the lost in order for that suffering to be necessary in "satisfying" God's sense of justice. The word "satisfy" has some very different shades of meaning, and I can see no legitimate good to come from this kind of equivocation.
I get that you are keen to emphasize the points of doctrine that tend to call attention to God's extreme reluctance to allow us to suffer eternal loss. I applaud this disposition on your part. Undoubtedly, God's love toward us far exceeds our capacity for comprehension.
Thanks RG
I agree that God's justice and mercy are synonymous (as per Psalm 85:10 for example). In summary, I find that God's justice is manifest in either of two expressions:
1) for 'sinners' who are willing to embrace such, God's justice is restoring the 'sinner' back to the non-fallen state via rebirth (John 3:3-6) which involves a new heart and right Spirit (Ezekiel 36:26). This actually repairs the core issue of what got 'broken' in Eden (Genesis 3:6,7; Proverbs 4:23). Thus, 'justice' = to put back right again (ie restore to and in righteousness).
2) for 'sinners' who are unwilling to embrace salvation/restoration, God's justice (and righteousness/rightness) is the preservation of their freedom of choice to do this. Therefore God, after trying to draw them to the fullest extent possible without over-riding their freedom to choose against such, eventually reluctantly but nevertheless definitively releases them to their choice. In doing so, God therefore releases the full inherent consequences of that choice which, being the choice to embrace lawlessness (1 John 3:4) produces chaos which inherently produces destruction (as per Galatians 6:8 principle that unpacks the mechanism of Romans 8:2 and Romans 6:23). The inherent nature of the law of sin and death via the law of sowing and reaping (as direct rather than imposed cause-and-effect) makes the need for any further imposed punishment redundant. Human justice does not have the ability to release a violator to the full inherent consequences of their action and that is why imposed punishment is applied. God does not have this same limitation and therefore why imposed punishment is unnecessary.
I am glad you are offended by the notion of satisfaction. As you note, to satisfy has a wide range of applications and I was referring to it more as a settled state. However, I would invite consideration of the question, if no imposed punishment beyond the inherent self-destruction was observed at 'judgment', would there be in any way a sense of dissatisfaction? And what if the self-destruction was allowed as 'gently' as actually possible? Would that generate any sense of dissatisfaction?
What I am keen to portray goes far beyond "God's extreme reluctance to allow us to suffer eternal loss". For those who are interested, I am keen to portray that a biblical view of God's nature and character reveals that God is not the causative agent of destruction. Rather it is the inherent nature of sin/lawlessness (and the Kingdom of Darkness that has embraced the principles and practices of sin) that is exclusively responsible for producing such (as per the summary statement of John 10:10).
Thanks for your conversation...
Hi, Phil. Of course it may take some refection for people to see that even the unbeliever's sense of justice has its source in God, and that the "satisfaction" of justice itself will be critical to placing the universe on a basis of eternal security. I'm not out to persuade you by writing again, nor do I need to have the last word. The problem is your statement that you "agree" with me that God's justice and His mercy are synonymous. I did not say this, nor do I believe it. God's justice is a real thing, and so distinct from mercy that it is easy to assume that they are incompatible with each other. Hence, there is a tendency to downplay the one in order to uphold the other. The testimony of Scripture is that, amazingly, God has found a way to fulfill both without compromising either one.
I do believe in standing up for God's character. However, I do not believe in bringing it down to our low level of comprehension. God can be fully just and still save the humble, penitent soul. And no, retributive justice is not a satanic element, as some here have suggested. It may be based on the amount of suffering caused by the finally impenitent, as you have suggested, but of course that would include indirect effects.
Phil, you said
for sin destroys all who cling to it. But it will be the inherent nature and character of sin that will do the destroying.
Please explain, it almost sounds like you are saying that sin is a power or being in the universe that destroys.
It almost sounds like 1Peter 5:8 the devil seeking whom he may devour?
Do the wicked destroy themselves?
Hi Shirley
Thanks for asking for clarification on what I appreciate is a sensitive and complex topic. While it may perhaps almost sound like I am saying that sin is a being or 'power entity', I am rather saying sin is more an inanimate principle of cause-and-effect or sowing-and-reaping (as per Galatians 6:7,8). Perhaps you recall Paul labelling this phenomenon "the law (ie inherent cause and effect 'relationship') of sin and death" in Romans 8:2.
Law (ie constant principles of operation) is essential to life largely by the inherent order that it promotes. Sin, as lawlessness (1 John 3:4 - 'anomia' meaning without law) fails to promote this necessary order and thereby promotes chaos. And chaos precludes life and thereby causatively produces destruction - which functionally is the law/principle of sin and death.
Satan has embraced the principles of lawlessness and therefore is aligned with the law of sin and death. And according to Ellen White, Satan is active in causing chaos through 'nature' for the purpose of fostering destruction, misery and death as expression of his maleficent (or "malignant" as Ellen White refers to it) nature.
Essentially, in a way, the wicked destroy themselves in so far that they are responsible for their destruction via their preference (heart's desire) to hold to the law of sin and death (as per Genesis 6:5 diagnostic statement). But it is the inherent nature of chaos that is the actual causative agency of their destruction - though this is not some kind of 'power' or being.
It is interesting that light and darkness are used as metaphors for the above phenomena in scripture. Darkness is the state where light is not present (as per Genesis 1:2). And death is the state where life is not present. With Jesus/God being the only viable life that also is the light of men (John 1:4), anything other than being both in harmony with God and in harmony with the laws of life is going to be precluded from being alive. That is why God's statement to Adam and Eve in Genesis 2:16,17 was actually truth even though it didn't seem to eventuate in that very day due to God stepping in and restraining the full consequences (for the purpose of probation for salvation/restoration/redemption) that would otherwise have seen humanity become extinct on that very day.
Again, I appreciate this is a challenging topic to explore and therefore it will likely take more conversational exchanges - so please ask further questions or raise further concerns or objections. I can substantiate further what I am outlining if/as required both from the bible and Ellen White's writings, just not in a few paragraphs.
The idea that our God of everlasting mercy (Jeremiah 33:11 KJV; Psalm 136:1 KJV) will put each of the lost on a rotisserie with different timers is repugnant to me.
This idea is satanic and more characteristic of the enemy than the Friend (John 15:15).
I have often asked my patients who suffer from unforgiveness, "if given the opportunity without consequence, would you pull the 'trigger' and end the eternal life of the one who hurt you."
Without fail, the answer is always a resounding "NO."
The idea of a loving God keeping sinners alive for one nanosecond longer for the purpose of torturing them a bit more for justice sake is evil at it's very base.
Thanks for your comment Sieg and for including the anecdotal 'data' from your patients.
I absolutely agree with you that the notion of God being responsible for adding even one nanosecond of imposed punishment for the purposes of infliction of suffering (torture) in the name of alleged 'justice' is as you have said "evil at its very base". Yet, this very notion has been ever so subtly embraced within mainstream Christianity without conscious awareness.
On the other hand, releasing someone to the inherent consequences of their ultimate free choice to embrace lawlessness (1 John 3:4) after every possible non-coercive effort has been made to entice them otherwise and has been steadfastly resisted by them, and to do so to in the most 'humane' way possible is absolutely consistent with Agape love/beneficence.
For what it's worth, here is a further question you might ask certain patients that goes even a step further: ""if given the opportunity to do so, would you choose to have the one who hurt you be sent into eternal oblivion with or without experiencing pain and suffering along the way to that oblivion?"
The 9/11 highjackeers shouted “God is great” as they spilled innocent blood. Their merciless crimes will be remembered in perpetuity as are those of the Assyrians. Let us pray that the legacy of the people of God will also be remembered for our declaration of God’s greatness and mercy by doing his will as described in Isaiah 58:6-12
As a person of Indian decent growing up under Jim crow's law and voter suppression with the Klan threatening on all sides, I can relate with Jonah. but being born again has taught me that the battle belongs to THE LORD! If HE feel that they are worth dying for, well then , who am I, a sinner saved by HIS grace also!!!
Your sharing is appreciated. A couple of texts that in my opinion are supportive.
“Blessed is the man who trusts in the Lord , And whose hope is the Lord".
Jeremiah 17:7 NKJV
"Vengeance is Mine, and recompense; Their foot shall slip in due time; For the day of their calamity is at hand, And the things to come hasten upon them."
Deuteronomy 32:35.
To me, in a nutshell - the message about Jonah and Nineveh is: 'prophets are people too'! They are not any different in their personalities than the rest of us, they just have a special relationship with our Maker which makes them available to Him to be sent on special assignments as His messengers.
Knowing about the historical setting certainly helps to set the stage as it describes the most depraved conduct man is capable of against his fellow man, even under the circumstances of warfare.
But I focus my attention on Jonah, the person, who's personality is so set against forgiveness that it overpowers his willingness to trust God and so clashes with God's assignment to go to Nineveh, potentially compromising his own relationship with God.
I think that under these circumstances, God in His long-suffering empathizing with human frailty, reached out, wanting to teach Jonah a lesson and so change his heart.
Do we think to know God's and Jonah's mind, or do all of us speculate the best we can about what was on their mind and in their heart as we try to grasp the account's spiritual as well as intellectual meaning?
As I read the contributions from other participants, I find that each of us interprets the meaning of the story, that what we want to learn from it, in the way we are personally touched by it.
My personal take still is that his experience is for him and us to learn true forgiveness; to help us enter the Rest of God and His Son Christ Jesus as we learn the power of true forgiveness.
This account can also be seen as the testimony of the power of God's Holy Spirit causing repentance in man's heart; His spirit is even more powerful than the spirit in the most hardened, cruel heart! God demonstrates that His spirit can move event this heart to acknowledge its wrongs when presented with the value of the Light of Peace with God through forgiveness.
Both, the people of Nineveh and Jonah, had to learn this lesson, and I am certain that we do as well. Nineveh had to accept their guilt first before accepting forgiveness and receive peace with God, and Jonah had to learn what true forgiveness is, it is not judgmental, and trust God's ways rather than his own understanding.
Brigitte, I find that I have a different understanding of the Holy Spirit than you.
I believe that the Triune God is made up of three co-eternal beings the Father, Son and Holy Spirit as found in Matt 28:19. I would rather say God, the Holy Spirit, works on our hearts and minds to convince us of the truth. He is not God's spirit He is a separate divine being. God the Father, God the Son and God the Holy Spirit are equal Partners in the Godhead that have always existed together eternally. Together they created this world and together they decided on the Plan of Salvation and their different roles in the plan.
I agree Shirley.
I believe that Grace is The Father, Mercy is the Son, and Peace is the Holy Spirit.
To Titus, a true son in our common faith: Grace, mercy, and Peace from God the Father and the Lord Jesus Christ our Saviour. Titus 1:4. This was Paul favorite greeting. I think he had a purpose for using this greeting. Maybe it was also to let people know that he would baptise in the name of the Father, the Son, and Holy Spirit, as Christ had commanded.
Now I also believe that Mercy, Grace, and Peace is the character of all three of the Trinity.
Shirley, when referring to 'God' in the context as the Trinity, then, yes, three separate powers are expressed; none existing without the other. They are united in the source of their power, but separate in form and expression.
Referring to the Holy Spirit as God's voice, using the form of the possessive noun, I focused on the Trinity's indivisibility, speaking as one with one purpose. The Holy Spirit is as much an individual as it is an intrinsic, active, expressive, teaching part of the Trinity; it is God's Voice. That is his function and he cannot and does not exist outside of the Trinity - I think the Holy Spirit and the Son of God are manifestations of God the Father, and we are His/their children.
God's blessings for mankind come through the indivisible Trinity - the Father, the Son and the Holy Spirit, using the powers vested in them. I do not think that my wording - 'the 'Father's spirit'' - undermines the Truth of the concept of the individuality of the Trinity of God.
The Father, Son, and Holy Spirit are indivisible in the source of their power and purpose, though individuals in their expression and application - this is how I understand the Trinity of God.
I agree with much of what you've said. My concept of God's nature has changed with time, and may change again. I think there's room for many variations in understanding this topic, until we see Him 'face to face'.
I'm therefore just a little bit sorry that the topic of God's nature has been embedded as a doctrine in our Fundamentals! Father, Son and Holy Spirit - yes. But exactly what and how we are not 100% certain. We know more about Jesus because He is 'one of us'. And perhaps that's all we need to know for now.
There is one Spirit we're told, but it seems interchangeably "the Spirit of God" and "the Spirit of Jesus Christ". The Father? EGW says in Early Writings, "I have often seen the lovely Jesus, that He is a person. I asked Him if His Father was a person and had a form like Himself. Said Jesus, "I am in the express image of My Father's person."
I eagerly seize on every bit of information that might help me understand who God is. For now, I believe He and His Son (inherently also divine) are welded together even more tightly by Their Spirit than a Trinity suggests.
So - I still don't have a complete understanding of what God is. Perhaps it's more important to know WHO God is - and to worship Him.
Judy - thank you for sharing your thoughts. I agree, the mystery of the Trinity will be better understood as 'we see Him 'face to face''. Church doctrine is just that - church doctrine. I have not read Early Writings, only the most well known of Ellen White's books.
The work of the Holy Spirit has become one of my focal points when I read the Old Testament as well as the Gospel of Christ Jesus and the books written about it by His apostles.
Scripture has many passages that speak to the Father, the Son and the Holy Spirit, though I most appreciate the recorded words as spoken by Christ Jesus related to this matter.
I am certain the Father will grant a better spiritual understanding to all who earnestly seek it, that's His nature - we grow in Christ;"until we all reach unity in the faith and in the knowledge of the Son of God as we mature to the full measure of the stature of Christ. Eph.4:13.
The history around Nineveh is intriguing, and may have something to do with the reason Jonah ran from God. The real reason is in my opinion, he had not come to the build of charactor point in his life that Samuel did. "Yes Lord thy servant heareth" which we find in the storicle of Young Samuel, is implyed, "and doeth". 1Samuel 3:4. Not so complex is it? The Lord asketh I doeth. We out of disobedience make it complex.
Did the Lord put fear in Jonah to comply?
I believe Jonah did not want to do as the Lord asked not because he was afraid of the Assyrians...but he was afraid that they would listen and repent, and he knew God was a God of Mercy and would therefore forgive and not destroy them - when he believed that they deserved to be punished. He was judging them and not letting got have the final judgment.
"God's strange act" could be as simple as the revealing of Himself in glory. We're told our God is as a "refining fire" and that if we could see Him in our (sinful) flesh we would cease to exist.
Acknowledging that sin is real (it can be transferred from the sinner to the Saviour and on to the scapegoat) is it too far-fetched to consider it "fuel"?
My current understanding, knowing God's justice and mercy, is that God's unshielded presence will ignite the sin that has been cherished by every sinner. The fire will consume the sinner along with the fuel of their sin - just as long as the fuel lasts.
The thought of any human determining in advance the exact degree of punishment for each sinner fills me with horror. Surely this is not heaven's intent. Examining the records, for me, means understanding why so-and-so is not there with us, and understanding enough to be satisfied by God's justice.
When God performs His "strange act," whatever it may be, the sin within each of the lost will burn as long as it lasts, without any input from the saved.