The fourth and last objection refers to _man_ rather than God. It is that the endless misery of the wicked would destroy the happiness of the righteous; for how could a man enjoy heaven if he knew that his own father and mother were in endless and hopeless misery elsewhere? Of course, if we deny him his memory, and say he does not remember them, it destroys his identity, and for all practical purposes, he is a different man. I have not met with any satisfactory answer to this difficulty. But it may be pointed out that if he knows his parents' fate, he will certainly know their character too, and that their fate was deserved. And this may alter his feelings in regard to them, as it often does now, if we find that one of our friends has behaved in a mean, and disgraceful manner. Reviewing all these objections, it must be admitted that the endless misery of the wicked seems improbable, but it is certainly not _incredible_. For, to put it shortly, our knowledge of human nature convinces us that, out of a large number of wicked men, some at all events will continue to be wicked, _i.e._ to commit sin as long as they live. Hence, if they live for ever, they will sin for ever. And if they sin for ever, it is not only just, but perhaps inevitable, that they should be miserable for ever. And if so, the endless misery of the wicked does not reflect on either the power, justice, or mercy of God, and, as said above, is certainly not incredible. (2.) _Their endless happiness._ We pass on now to the next theory, that of their _endless happiness_. According to this, all the wicked (after some suitable punishment) will at last be reconciled to God, and in popular language, go to heaven. And there are several texts which are more or less in favour of this view.[477] But how are we to reconcile these with the far stronger ones before alluded to? The most probable explanation is that they are merely general statements, indicating the final destiny of the vast majority of mankind, but that there are exceptions to this as to most other rules. And the Creed nowhere implies that most men will be lost; it may be only a few obstinate sinners. [Footnote 477: _E.g._, Col. 1. 20; 1 Tim. 4. 10; 1 John 2. 2; Rev. 5. 13.] Moreover, we cannot think that the wicked will be allowed to go on sinning in heaven, so if they go there, they must finally cease to commit sin. Many may do this voluntarily, but what about the remainder? If they _must_ finally forsake sin, whether they like it or not, it destroys their free will, and leads to _compulsory goodness_, which is very like a contradiction in terms. For goodness cannot be ascribed to mere machines without free will, which only act under compulsion; yet on this theory the men would be nothing more. In fact, the wicked _men_ would in reality have been destroyed, and a good piece of mechanism created instead; which scarcely seems a probable theory.