A Picture Worth a Thousand References by Suzanne Hadley Gosselin on 11/20/2008 at 3:11 PM

OK, so this is just cool. Like, give-you-goosebumps cool.

Christianity Today has posted an image of biblical cross references:

When Christoph Römhild, a Lutheran pastor in Hamburg, Germany, sent Carnegie Mellon Ph.D. student Chris Harrison a list of 63,779 cross-references between the Bible's 1,189 chapters, the two became enthralled with elegantly showing the interconnected nature of Scripture. Each bar along the horizontal axis represents a chapter, with the length determined by the number of verses. (Books alternate in color between white and light gray.) Colors represent the distance between references.

I'm surprised by how the graphic affects me. Seeing a visual representation of a deep truth is beautiful on many levels. How can you look at that and maintain that the Bible is contradictory?

The graph won an honorable mention in the 2008 International Science and Engineering Visualization Challenge, which was sponsored by the National Science Foundation and Science journal.

A Picture Worth a Thousand References by Suzanne Hadley Gosselin on 11/20/2008 at 3:11 PM

OK, so this is just cool. Like, give-you-goosebumps cool.

Christianity Today has posted an image of biblical cross references:

When Christoph Römhild, a Lutheran pastor in Hamburg, Germany, sent Carnegie Mellon Ph.D. student Chris Harrison a list of 63,779 cross-references between the Bible's 1,189 chapters, the two became enthralled with elegantly showing the interconnected nature of Scripture. Each bar along the horizontal axis represents a chapter, with the length determined by the number of verses. (Books alternate in color between white and light gray.) Colors represent the distance between references.

I'm surprised by how the graphic affects me. Seeing a visual representation of a deep truth is beautiful on many levels. How can you look at that and maintain that the Bible is contradictory?

The graph won an honorable mention in the 2008 International Science and Engineering Visualization Challenge, which was sponsored by the National Science Foundation and Science journal.

Comments

[1. Becca said the following at 4:45 PM on Nov 20:]

1

Here's Chris Harrison's website about his project - it's got much higher quality images and lots of other neat information about the study.

[2. BDB said the following at 5:47 PM on Nov 20:]

2

That is really neat. Thanks for sharing it with us.

[3. farmer Tom said the following at 8:32 PM on Nov 20:]

3

A speaker at my daughters (two) Bible camp showed them this picture. They came home to tell me about it. A month or two later I lead the Bible study on Wednesday night, and talked about the reliability of Scripture, and the beauty in it's agreement within it's self. I closed my study by showing that picture. The Bible is truly an amazing book. And this is a great illustration of its
interdependence.

[4. Dani said the following at 8:44 PM on Nov 20:]

4

Beautiful!

(What is the yellow arc in the middle? I'm guessing it connects the gospels to the Leviticus and Deuteronomy, but I wish the books were labeled.)

[5. Denny said the following at 10:09 PM on Nov 20:]

5

Wow!!!

[6. brx said the following at 1:08 AM on Nov 21:]

6

Uh, being an engineer, and one who happens to appreciate good graphical representation of information, I feel compelled to mention that this rainbow of statistics doesn't say anything of the quality of the cross references nor the truth of God's word. But it is a neat way of representing a bunch of data cross-links. Labeling the axis and colors would be nice too. I would have voted them an award. :)

Grace & peace & fun with numbers.

[7. Kevin said the following at 7:10 AM on Nov 21:]

7

"How can you look at that and maintain that the Bible is contradictory?"

I do it by comparing the God described in Hosea 13:16, to the God described in 2 Kings 14:6. Or the unmerciful God described in 2 Samuel 6:6-7 to the merciful God described in John 8:11.

[8. Hannah said the following at 8:46 AM on Nov 21:]

8

That is *amazing*...though not surprising. Just taking a look at the beautiful symmetry of Genesis 1 ("In the beginning, God") and John 1 ("In the beginning, was the Word"), God's sovereignty is incomprehensible.

[9. Dr. Ransom said the following at 9:01 AM on Nov 21:]

9

Fascinating!

I wonder, though, is there a way to graph or determine from the existing graph, whether the reference is backward, such as the New Testament quoting the old, or forward -- vice-versa, or prophetic referencing?

[10. Suzanne said the following at 10:03 AM on Nov 21:]

10

Kevin,

There's one in every crowd. But you're right, I realized I was overstating with that question. Still, I think this speaks to the overall connection and integrity of Scripture.

[11. IMO said the following at 10:38 AM on Nov 21:]

11

Kevin,

Sigh.

As far as your verses go, they are certainly cherry-picked. So I will go with it and cherry-pick this verse from Romans 9:18,"Therefore God has mercy on whom he wants to have mercy, and he hardens whom he wants to harden." You can look up that verse and read it in its context, too.

If you believe in the God of the Bible, then you must accept that there are several "contradicting"
attributes to God. He has many Names as well. He is who He says He is.

Maybe I'm reading too much in your comment...but it did annoy me because it came off so smug.

[12. Melissa said the following at 12:33 PM on Nov 21:]

12

I don't see anything wrong with what Kevin said. Instead of saying that his comments annoyed us, we should be thrilled that there's a seeker on this website that is actually taking the time to examine Bible verses and use his God-given mind and intelligence to investigate things. Many of us have been right where he is - and many of us may still be there. Keep seeking and investigating, Kevin, for you will find Him when you seek Him with all your heart. :-)

[13. IMO said the following at 1:32 PM on Nov 21:]

13

His comment annoyed me. I don't speak for anybody else.

You call cherry-picking verses to actual bible study? um sorry, no comparison.

Also, how did you get from Jeremy's comment that he was seeking and investigating God, especially with all his heart? How do you know he is even a seeker?

Wow you assume A LOT.

[14. IMO said the following at 1:33 PM on Nov 21:]

14

PS How about applauding me, while you are at it, for bringing up a verse for actual conversation?
I feel slighted.

[15. Margaret said the following at 3:23 PM on Nov 21:]

15

"Contradicton"? Perhaps "tension" is a better term. There are many facets to God's nature. The Bible explains in the best ways it can God's nature as was revealed in certain situations and to certain people. Neither is better. Both are correct. All are different.

The troubles start when we try to say "this" one is the "right" one.

[16. Kevin said the following at 8:45 PM on Nov 21:]

16

Just because I brought up verses that paint contradictory pictures of God, doesn't automatically mean I cherry-picked them. IMO, can you explain what is so out of context about the verses I picked?

And Suzanne, you're right. It definitely looks cool when represented so graphically and colorfully. The scripture is very interconnected to itself. But so is Green Eggs and Ham. :)

I'm not smug, sorry if my writing style comes off that way.

[17. Heidi said the following at 3:46 PM on Nov 22:]

17

I personally didn't see any contradiction in the passages that Kevin stated. God is a God of wrath, yes. Which makes the beauty and majesty of Jesus coming even more powerful because he took all that on himself so that condemned people who deserve to be "dashed to pieces and ripped open" (Hosea 13:16) can be forgiven, sent away, and told to "sin no more"(John 8:11). There are consequences to our sin. War, abuse and miserable lives are out there because humans bring it on themselves or other humans bring it on us because of sin in the world. God wants to save us from that but he will not make us obey. So if someone is hurt by this world, it is not because God wished us harm or causes it. He morns for us and want to comfort us in our misery. He wants to save us from our own sin and love us as sons and daughter.

So, Kevin, again I say, I see no contradiction in these verses and I hope you and others will look at these verses in the context of the wonderful love story that the Bible is.

[18. Samantha said the following at 9:25 AM on Nov 24:]

18

Yeah...anyway, the picture is pretty!!

[19. Kevin said the following at 11:07 AM on Nov 24:]

19

"You call cherry-picking verses to actual bible study? um sorry, no comparison."..."Wow you assume A LOT."

Seems like you're assuming that the verses I brought up were "cherry-picked." The tone of your responses also seems to assume that I'm just doing this to try to deceive people or to lead them to believe lies, rather than doing it to voice my own observations, which are that to me the Bible DOES seem to actually paint contradictory pictures of God between different parts of it. I did nothing more than post a few bible verses. You make it seem that by doing so I did something bad. What's up with that IMO?

And then you go and imply that the parts of the bible that I brought up aren't worthy of "actual conversation."

"PS How about applauding me, while you are at it, for bringing up a verse for actual conversation?
I feel slighted."

I think you need to calm down a bit and think about what you're saying.

[20. IMO said the following at 2:30 PM on Nov 24:]

20

I was joking when I said,
"PS How about applauding me, while you are at it, for bringing up a verse for actual conversation?
I feel slighted."

Like it's funny to me how defensive Melissa got over your verses but said nothing of mine. That's all.

And sorry, I wasn't implying your verses are not up discussion. I actually looked up your verses and then found a verse (from Romans 9:18) that tied your verses together.

I have learned that throwing out bible verses isn't the best idea. And I do very strongly believe that God does not contradict Himself (even when a few verses in the Bible do).

Hope I cleared up my position.

[21. Leah said the following at 8:49 PM on Nov 24:]

21

Kevin, it's no assumption to say those verses were cherry-picked, because IMO and many other people on here know their contexts, and know you've ignored the contexts.

God does not contradict himself. There is always reason for his mercy, and reason for when he doesn't have mercy. If I'm to show mercy on Person A, does that mean I'm obliged to be merciful to everybody? Of course not.

We see different aspects of God in different parts of the bible. Just like my fellow university students would have seen me as a quiet worker with reasonable grades; my church friends see me as a bubbly and friendly; my youth group kids see me as a teacher and probably sometimes a party-pooper for telling them to stop talking and go to sleep at midnight on a camp.

So here I am; a teacher and a student- someone might say that's contradictory. Here I am; bubbly and friendly but a party pooper; someone might say that's contradictory. But they wouldn't be taking the context into consideration.

In your Hosea verse, the people of Samaria have rebelled against God and must bear the consequences. Yes, God could have chosen to show mercy, but in this instance, didn't. There were many times throughout the Old Testament where God showed the Israelites mercy, and there were many times that they continually rebelled and so he delivered them to their enemies. If you read through the book of Judges, you will see a pattern; the Israelites rebel; God delivers them to their enemies; they cry out for help; God sends someone to save them; they live peacefully for a while, and then the cycle starts again.

In the 2 Kings passage, it would have been breaking God's law for a father to put his son to death. Instead, they let the assassins live, but those assassins would still ultimately have to face God's judgment. It's ultimately not much different to the above situation.

You also compare a 2 Sam passage to a John passage. You must understand the difference in the relationship between God and his people between the Old Testament and the New. When Jesus came, he became the ultimate sacrifice and ultimate bridge between God and man. All we have to do to be forgiven now is trust in Jesus and repent. In the 2 Sam passage, there was explicit instruction that no man could touch the ark of the covenant. You must also realise that God is a trinity; that is, three persons in one. God the father (also referred to as the LORD); God the son (also referred to as Jesus) and God the Holy Spirit (also called Holy Ghost). Jesus' role is not to judge. That is God the father's role. So pointing to the John passage, where Jesus does not judge the adultress, means nothing. If she did not leave her life of sin, you can bet your bottom dollar she would have eventually met God's judgment just like Uzziah did in the 2 Sam passage.

So I'm afraid, no contradiction. You have to understand the context.

[22. Kevin said the following at 10:28 AM on Nov 25:]

22

I do understand the context, I've read through all of these stories.

"In your Hosea verse, the people of Samaria have rebelled against God and must bear the consequences."

The people of Samaria rebelled against God, so that includes the children and the unborn babies? Christians say that God is against abortion, yet here he's planning to rip pregnant women open?

Honestly, reading that God is planning on having "little ones dashed to the ground" makes me furious. I mean, you see anyone else in the world take a child and dash them to the ground, you get angry right? Yet it's ok if God does it? That makes no sense.

You know, as a whole I'd say America is a pretty rebellious nation too. So, you'll be ok if all of our children are dashed to the ground then right? You'll approve of pregnant women being ripped open, because our nation is rebellious. America must bear it's guilt, that includes the kids, babies, and the unborn.

And as far as Uzziah goes, I'd say it's pretty unmerciful to strike him dead for trying to keep God's precious arc from falling over. His heart was in the right place, but yet he was struck dead because of a technicallity of the law. Jesus healed on the sabbath. That is a direct violation of God's law. Why wasn't he struck dead? I mean, his heart was in the right place in healing the man, but technically he broke the law.

To me, it's not very merciful to kill Uzziah for trying to do the right thing, just because it broke a law to do so, even though Jesus got away with it.

[23. Kevin said the following at 10:39 AM on Nov 25:]

23

I forgot to add this too. Leah you said:

"If I'm to show mercy on Person A, does that mean I'm obliged to be merciful to everybody? Of course not."

You're right, you're not obligated to be merciful to everyone just because you're merciful to one. But, you're still being contradictory by not showing mercy to everyone, even though you're not obligated to do so, because you weren't obligated to be merciful to person A either.

If you show mercy to person A, but show none to anyone else, you're being contradictory. Does that mean it's better not to show mercy at all? No. But when you have just as much ability to be merciful to everyone as you were to person A, but yet choose not to, you are being contradictory.

One of the definitions of contradiction is inconsistency. (Webster's dictionary)

[24. Christina (in green) said the following at 2:23 PM on Nov 26:]

24

Kevin,

Haven't read the entire post but I think God has been described as perfect justice and perfect mercy?

I always was under the impression that the amount of justice and mercy displayed (the balance) is based strongly on discernment.

And humans aren't perfect with it, but God certainly is.

Two children that do the same exact deed may have different attitudes accompanying it. The one that grins at me afterwards as if to say "you said no, but it didn't stop me anyway" is more likely to get more justice and less mercy than the one who was simply confused by what "no" meant.

[1. Becca said the following at 4:45 PM on Nov 20:]

1

Here's Chris Harrison's website about his project - it's got much higher quality images and lots of other neat information about the study.

[2. BDB said the following at 5:47 PM on Nov 20:]

2

That is really neat. Thanks for sharing it with us.

[3. farmer Tom said the following at 8:32 PM on Nov 20:]

3

A speaker at my daughters (two) Bible camp showed them this picture. They came home to tell me about it. A month or two later I lead the Bible study on Wednesday night, and talked about the reliability of Scripture, and the beauty in it's agreement within it's self. I closed my study by showing that picture. The Bible is truly an amazing book. And this is a great illustration of its
interdependence.

[4. Dani said the following at 8:44 PM on Nov 20:]

4

Beautiful!

(What is the yellow arc in the middle? I'm guessing it connects the gospels to the Leviticus and Deuteronomy, but I wish the books were labeled.)

[5. Denny said the following at 10:09 PM on Nov 20:]

5

Wow!!!

[6. brx said the following at 1:08 AM on Nov 21:]

6

Uh, being an engineer, and one who happens to appreciate good graphical representation of information, I feel compelled to mention that this rainbow of statistics doesn't say anything of the quality of the cross references nor the truth of God's word. But it is a neat way of representing a bunch of data cross-links. Labeling the axis and colors would be nice too. I would have voted them an award. :)

Grace & peace & fun with numbers.

[7. Kevin said the following at 7:10 AM on Nov 21:]

7

"How can you look at that and maintain that the Bible is contradictory?"

I do it by comparing the God described in Hosea 13:16, to the God described in 2 Kings 14:6. Or the unmerciful God described in 2 Samuel 6:6-7 to the merciful God described in John 8:11.

[8. Hannah said the following at 8:46 AM on Nov 21:]

8

That is *amazing*...though not surprising. Just taking a look at the beautiful symmetry of Genesis 1 ("In the beginning, God") and John 1 ("In the beginning, was the Word"), God's sovereignty is incomprehensible.

[9. Dr. Ransom said the following at 9:01 AM on Nov 21:]

9

Fascinating!

I wonder, though, is there a way to graph or determine from the existing graph, whether the reference is backward, such as the New Testament quoting the old, or forward -- vice-versa, or prophetic referencing?

[10. Suzanne said the following at 10:03 AM on Nov 21:]

10

Kevin,

There's one in every crowd. But you're right, I realized I was overstating with that question. Still, I think this speaks to the overall connection and integrity of Scripture.

[11. IMO said the following at 10:38 AM on Nov 21:]

11

Kevin,

Sigh.

As far as your verses go, they are certainly cherry-picked. So I will go with it and cherry-pick this verse from Romans 9:18,"Therefore God has mercy on whom he wants to have mercy, and he hardens whom he wants to harden." You can look up that verse and read it in its context, too.

If you believe in the God of the Bible, then you must accept that there are several "contradicting"
attributes to God. He has many Names as well. He is who He says He is.

Maybe I'm reading too much in your comment...but it did annoy me because it came off so smug.

[12. Melissa said the following at 12:33 PM on Nov 21:]

12

I don't see anything wrong with what Kevin said. Instead of saying that his comments annoyed us, we should be thrilled that there's a seeker on this website that is actually taking the time to examine Bible verses and use his God-given mind and intelligence to investigate things. Many of us have been right where he is - and many of us may still be there. Keep seeking and investigating, Kevin, for you will find Him when you seek Him with all your heart. :-)

[13. IMO said the following at 1:32 PM on Nov 21:]

13

His comment annoyed me. I don't speak for anybody else.

You call cherry-picking verses to actual bible study? um sorry, no comparison.

Also, how did you get from Jeremy's comment that he was seeking and investigating God, especially with all his heart? How do you know he is even a seeker?

Wow you assume A LOT.

[14. IMO said the following at 1:33 PM on Nov 21:]

14

PS How about applauding me, while you are at it, for bringing up a verse for actual conversation?
I feel slighted.

[15. Margaret said the following at 3:23 PM on Nov 21:]

15

"Contradicton"? Perhaps "tension" is a better term. There are many facets to God's nature. The Bible explains in the best ways it can God's nature as was revealed in certain situations and to certain people. Neither is better. Both are correct. All are different.

The troubles start when we try to say "this" one is the "right" one.

[16. Kevin said the following at 8:45 PM on Nov 21:]

16

Just because I brought up verses that paint contradictory pictures of God, doesn't automatically mean I cherry-picked them. IMO, can you explain what is so out of context about the verses I picked?

And Suzanne, you're right. It definitely looks cool when represented so graphically and colorfully. The scripture is very interconnected to itself. But so is Green Eggs and Ham. :)

I'm not smug, sorry if my writing style comes off that way.

[17. Heidi said the following at 3:46 PM on Nov 22:]

17

I personally didn't see any contradiction in the passages that Kevin stated. God is a God of wrath, yes. Which makes the beauty and majesty of Jesus coming even more powerful because he took all that on himself so that condemned people who deserve to be "dashed to pieces and ripped open" (Hosea 13:16) can be forgiven, sent away, and told to "sin no more"(John 8:11). There are consequences to our sin. War, abuse and miserable lives are out there because humans bring it on themselves or other humans bring it on us because of sin in the world. God wants to save us from that but he will not make us obey. So if someone is hurt by this world, it is not because God wished us harm or causes it. He morns for us and want to comfort us in our misery. He wants to save us from our own sin and love us as sons and daughter.

So, Kevin, again I say, I see no contradiction in these verses and I hope you and others will look at these verses in the context of the wonderful love story that the Bible is.

[18. Samantha said the following at 9:25 AM on Nov 24:]

18

Yeah...anyway, the picture is pretty!!

[19. Kevin said the following at 11:07 AM on Nov 24:]

19

"You call cherry-picking verses to actual bible study? um sorry, no comparison."..."Wow you assume A LOT."

Seems like you're assuming that the verses I brought up were "cherry-picked." The tone of your responses also seems to assume that I'm just doing this to try to deceive people or to lead them to believe lies, rather than doing it to voice my own observations, which are that to me the Bible DOES seem to actually paint contradictory pictures of God between different parts of it. I did nothing more than post a few bible verses. You make it seem that by doing so I did something bad. What's up with that IMO?

And then you go and imply that the parts of the bible that I brought up aren't worthy of "actual conversation."

"PS How about applauding me, while you are at it, for bringing up a verse for actual conversation?
I feel slighted."

I think you need to calm down a bit and think about what you're saying.

[20. IMO said the following at 2:30 PM on Nov 24:]

20

I was joking when I said,
"PS How about applauding me, while you are at it, for bringing up a verse for actual conversation?
I feel slighted."

Like it's funny to me how defensive Melissa got over your verses but said nothing of mine. That's all.

And sorry, I wasn't implying your verses are not up discussion. I actually looked up your verses and then found a verse (from Romans 9:18) that tied your verses together.

I have learned that throwing out bible verses isn't the best idea. And I do very strongly believe that God does not contradict Himself (even when a few verses in the Bible do).

Hope I cleared up my position.

[21. Leah said the following at 8:49 PM on Nov 24:]

21

Kevin, it's no assumption to say those verses were cherry-picked, because IMO and many other people on here know their contexts, and know you've ignored the contexts.

God does not contradict himself. There is always reason for his mercy, and reason for when he doesn't have mercy. If I'm to show mercy on Person A, does that mean I'm obliged to be merciful to everybody? Of course not.

We see different aspects of God in different parts of the bible. Just like my fellow university students would have seen me as a quiet worker with reasonable grades; my church friends see me as a bubbly and friendly; my youth group kids see me as a teacher and probably sometimes a party-pooper for telling them to stop talking and go to sleep at midnight on a camp.

So here I am; a teacher and a student- someone might say that's contradictory. Here I am; bubbly and friendly but a party pooper; someone might say that's contradictory. But they wouldn't be taking the context into consideration.

In your Hosea verse, the people of Samaria have rebelled against God and must bear the consequences. Yes, God could have chosen to show mercy, but in this instance, didn't. There were many times throughout the Old Testament where God showed the Israelites mercy, and there were many times that they continually rebelled and so he delivered them to their enemies. If you read through the book of Judges, you will see a pattern; the Israelites rebel; God delivers them to their enemies; they cry out for help; God sends someone to save them; they live peacefully for a while, and then the cycle starts again.

In the 2 Kings passage, it would have been breaking God's law for a father to put his son to death. Instead, they let the assassins live, but those assassins would still ultimately have to face God's judgment. It's ultimately not much different to the above situation.

You also compare a 2 Sam passage to a John passage. You must understand the difference in the relationship between God and his people between the Old Testament and the New. When Jesus came, he became the ultimate sacrifice and ultimate bridge between God and man. All we have to do to be forgiven now is trust in Jesus and repent. In the 2 Sam passage, there was explicit instruction that no man could touch the ark of the covenant. You must also realise that God is a trinity; that is, three persons in one. God the father (also referred to as the LORD); God the son (also referred to as Jesus) and God the Holy Spirit (also called Holy Ghost). Jesus' role is not to judge. That is God the father's role. So pointing to the John passage, where Jesus does not judge the adultress, means nothing. If she did not leave her life of sin, you can bet your bottom dollar she would have eventually met God's judgment just like Uzziah did in the 2 Sam passage.

So I'm afraid, no contradiction. You have to understand the context.

[22. Kevin said the following at 10:28 AM on Nov 25:]

22

I do understand the context, I've read through all of these stories.

"In your Hosea verse, the people of Samaria have rebelled against God and must bear the consequences."

The people of Samaria rebelled against God, so that includes the children and the unborn babies? Christians say that God is against abortion, yet here he's planning to rip pregnant women open?

Honestly, reading that God is planning on having "little ones dashed to the ground" makes me furious. I mean, you see anyone else in the world take a child and dash them to the ground, you get angry right? Yet it's ok if God does it? That makes no sense.

You know, as a whole I'd say America is a pretty rebellious nation too. So, you'll be ok if all of our children are dashed to the ground then right? You'll approve of pregnant women being ripped open, because our nation is rebellious. America must bear it's guilt, that includes the kids, babies, and the unborn.

And as far as Uzziah goes, I'd say it's pretty unmerciful to strike him dead for trying to keep God's precious arc from falling over. His heart was in the right place, but yet he was struck dead because of a technicallity of the law. Jesus healed on the sabbath. That is a direct violation of God's law. Why wasn't he struck dead? I mean, his heart was in the right place in healing the man, but technically he broke the law.

To me, it's not very merciful to kill Uzziah for trying to do the right thing, just because it broke a law to do so, even though Jesus got away with it.

[23. Kevin said the following at 10:39 AM on Nov 25:]

23

I forgot to add this too. Leah you said:

"If I'm to show mercy on Person A, does that mean I'm obliged to be merciful to everybody? Of course not."

You're right, you're not obligated to be merciful to everyone just because you're merciful to one. But, you're still being contradictory by not showing mercy to everyone, even though you're not obligated to do so, because you weren't obligated to be merciful to person A either.

If you show mercy to person A, but show none to anyone else, you're being contradictory. Does that mean it's better not to show mercy at all? No. But when you have just as much ability to be merciful to everyone as you were to person A, but yet choose not to, you are being contradictory.

One of the definitions of contradiction is inconsistency. (Webster's dictionary)

[24. Christina (in green) said the following at 2:23 PM on Nov 26:]

24

Kevin,

Haven't read the entire post but I think God has been described as perfect justice and perfect mercy?

I always was under the impression that the amount of justice and mercy displayed (the balance) is based strongly on discernment.

And humans aren't perfect with it, but God certainly is.

Two children that do the same exact deed may have different attitudes accompanying it. The one that grins at me afterwards as if to say "you said no, but it didn't stop me anyway" is more likely to get more justice and less mercy than the one who was simply confused by what "no" meant.