Hate the Sinner Too?
by Motte Brown on 09/18/2007 at 10:18 AM
I've heard it said my entire Christian life, "Hate the sin. Love the sinner. " Is it biblical?
Today Justin Taylor explores an article written over 60 years ago by John McKenzie who said we must hate the sinner as well as the sin.
Here's why:
There is a lawful hatred of the sinner; and indeed there must be, since such a hatred is the obverse of the love of God. The love of God hates all that is opposed to God; and sinners -- not merely sin -- are opposed to God. And if such a sentiment is lawful, its expression is lawful; and one may desire that the evil in another receive its corresponding evil -- provided that this hatred is restrained within the limits of that which is lawful.
The limits include,
- Hatred must be directed toward the evil quality, not the person
- Hatred must not be motivated by revenge
- Hatred can be harbored only if the sinner remains unrepentant
- Hatred must be accompanied by a desire for the supreme good of all men
The last point means (I think) that though we hate him and what he does, we must desire his eternal good.
There are several good quotes found in the comments section from Justin's post. My favorite was from John Piper which may help explain this doctrine of just hate,
There was a time when the mountain of granite was not under me but over me, ready to fall and crush me. It was the mountain of God's wrath against my sin. God hated me in my sin. Yes, I think we need to go the full Biblical length and say that God hates unrepentant sinners. If I were to soften it, as we so often do, and say that God hates sin, most of you would immediately translate that to mean: he hates sin but loves the sinner. But Psalm 5:5 says, "The boastful may not stand before thy eyes; thou hatest all evildoers." And Psalm 11:5 says, "The Lord tests the righteous and the wicked, and his soul hates him that loves violence."
What are your reflections on just hate?
1. Samuel PG said the following at 10:47 AM on Sep 18:
There seem to be some inherent problems in allowing ourselves to hate the sinner. First of all, such hatred must be "toward the evil quality" and "must not be motivated by revenge." God, of course, can hate with perfectly just hatred without a hint of wicked revenge. God could even perfectly direct His hatred toward the evil quality. Are we capable of doing that?
It seems that in allowing ourselves to hate sinners at all, we are opening ourselves up to sin because it will be near to impossible to hate within the proper confines of just hatred.
We must also ask ourselves what good comes from hating the sinner. Perhaps there is some, but I cannot think of even one example in which hatred of another person will be of benefit to anyone.
Finally, in seeking to justify the hatred of the sinner this must be in regard to the emotional state of feeling hatred alone. I say this because we prohibited from allowing any of the practical outworkings of such hatred. We are not allowed to store up bitterness but must forgive (Matt. 6:14-15, Eph. 4:31), we are commanded to seek to live peaceably with the sinner (Hebrews 12:14-15), we are not allowed to seek the harm of the sinner (Romans 12:14). If no practical application of hatred is allowed, why allow hatred to be birthed within us at all? We would be wise to remember that the same God Who hates sin also loves the world (John 3:16 of course) and that He prayed for the forgiveness of the very people who despised and crucified Him.
2. nikki said the following at 10:57 AM on Sep 18:
I've seen a lot of verses like the ones quotes when reading through Psalms. It was kind of confusing to me until I started realizing that they must mean God hates the sin, because we know from countless other verses that God actually DOES love everyone (that's EVERYONE, not only the elect). God can't love someone and hate them at the same time. I think it's equally impossible for us to hate them and still wish them to know God's love and his salvation. If I hated them, I'd want them to burn and burn. Right?
Point #1 up there: "Hatred must be directed toward the evil quality, not the person." Seems like another way of saying exactly what it's trying to disprove: "love the sinner, hate the sin." All of this seems convoluted to me and a little narrow as it totally ignores the fact of God's universal love for mankind.
This is kind of a side note, but this kind of preaching can instigate actual hateful acts (the crazies in Kansas City come to mind) at which we are rightly disgusted and saddened. I sure wouldn't want an unbelieving friend to read this post!
3. Jessica said the following at 11:11 AM on Sep 18:
Luke 10:26-28
"What is written in the Law?" he replied. "How do you read it?"
He answered: "'Love the Lord your God with all your heart and with all your soul and with all your strength and with all your mind'; and,'Love your neighbor as yourself.'" "You have answered correctly," Jesus replied. "Do this and you will live."
4. Jessica said the following at 11:19 AM on Sep 18:
The God I worship does not hate the man who stumbles into our church's evening service, drunk, not really paying attention to the worship or the message, but waits to go downstairs for the meal afterwards. This man is an alcoholic. This man doesn't want to stop drinking; not yet anyway. This man is a sinner. This man is also a child of God. This man is someone Jesus died on the cross for. This man is not hated by God. This man is not hated by our pastor. You can theologize and use fancy words and famous quotes all you want, but in my opinion, which is not based on a seminary degree or church doctrine, but on the life of Jesus and the work he has done in my life, we are never called to hate.
5. J.T. said the following at 11:41 AM on Sep 18:
That first limit: "Hatred must be directed at the evil quality, not the person." Isn't that hating the sin, loving the sinner?
6. Justice said the following at 11:46 AM on Sep 18:
Wow, lest people forget we are ALL sinners.
Is it truely possible to always hate the sin but not the sinner? Homosexuals view their "sin" as their identity, so in that case you cannot seperate the two. How can we really show love to the sinner if all you see is Christians being hateful to homosexuals, calling them abominations to their face?
Ya, Jesus got crazy in the temple, throwing stuff around, but he was also gentle with the women who had been married a LOT!
7. Mike Theemling said the following at 11:48 AM on Sep 18:
The very fact that the first limitation of "Hatred must be directed at the evil quality, not the person." implies that we do hate the sin and not the sinner.
Kind of ridiculous to claim we can if in reality we cannot by that ruleset.
8. Carrie said the following at 11:52 AM on Sep 18:
I think this phrase is much to blame for a lack of discipline in the church and thus the church has ended up in the disarray it has. People don't take sin seriously and turn the other cheek. We aren't supposed to turn the other cheek to sin! Yet so often we do!
I actually had a friend say to me the other day "The Bible says to hate the sin and love the sinner". I wanted to pull the car over, grab my Bible out of the back seat and have them show me where it says that. The Bible speaks to no such thing. Scripture commands us to stomp out sin and not give Satan a foothold.
There is a tension here though because we are sinners. We are not in heaven yet and even our understanding of love and sin is severely flawed. Yes, we must love our neighbor as ourselves, but as in order to love ourselves correctly we must love God first. If we love God first then we abhor evil. If we abhor evil, we seek to rid ourselves of it. We rid ourselves of it by humbling ourselves at the cross of Christ. By humbling ourselves we are able to treat one another with the humility and charity that Christ lived out.
Yes, love, but love Christ first and rather than your ability to hug a friend who is need. If you love Christ first and then love your neighbor as Christ loved you. He did not tolerate sin, but came to earth to die so that it would be wiped away. Christ did not hold up signs, but pointed to the miracles he performed as signs of His Father's love for His children. He overturned the tables in His Father's temple. He told His own disciple to "Get behind Me, Satan!" Christ did not hesistate to call a spade a spade so that His Father could be glorified. This is what we should be striving for.
9. nikki said the following at 11:54 AM on Sep 18:
I hate this post. :)
10. mindlab said the following at 11:56 AM on Sep 18:
"The limits include,. . .(h)atred must be directed toward the evil quality, not the person. . .(h)atred must be accompanied by a desire for the supreme good of all men."
I think this is exactly what is meant by, "Hate the sin. Love the sinner." This sounds like a semantic non-issue.
11. nikki said the following at 12:02 PM on Sep 18:
Oh yeah. Sorry to post so many times. But I have to say that this "theology of hatred" is little more than the logical outworking of the Calvinist idea that God created people just so he could watch them burn in hell forever.
12. Kevin said the following at 12:29 PM on Sep 18:
The Bible never says that God loves everyone. The closest you can get its John 3:16, but even there it does not say everyone, it says "the world." If God loves everyone, how could He have hated Esau?
To point at a particular post from nikki above: you say that God loves EVERYONE (not just the elect) and that it is impossible for Him to love and hate someone at the same time. That statement is just not biblical at all. If you say that God loves everyone, and that He can't love and hate someone at the same time, then He can't hate anyone. And if He can't hate anyone, how did he hate Esau? How can he hate all evildoers?
Hate the sin, love the sinner? I don't think God follows that. Psalm 11:5 says that God hates HIM who loves violence, it doesn't say that God hates the violence which the man loves. That directly says that God doesn't just hate the violence, but he hates the man who loves violence, and that would be hating the sinner.
So you can biblically prove that God hates the sinner. However, there is no direct statement in the Bible that I have found in which God commands US to hate sinners. (But I'm no scholar, I could be wrong) God tells us to love our neighbors and to serve others and many many other things which we would associate with love.
And who says that God cannot love and hate someone at the same time? Since when is God bound to our limited understanding of love and hate? We can never fully understand God's love, so how could we put it under the constraints of our own understanding? I think it is entirely possible for God to love and hate someone perfectly and at the same time. I mean, He's GOD.
13. Jessica said the following at 12:36 PM on Sep 18:
I would have to agree with Kevin that because God is God, and is perfect, only God could love and hate at the same time. And I'm greatful we don't have to understand how that works. And I'm unsure if I truly believe, as I wrote in a previous post, that God does not hate sinners. I don't know. BUT, I do stand by my word that we, as humans, are not called to hate. As someone said earlier, we can't have a perfect "just hate" because we are all sinners.
14. Brian said the following at 12:52 PM on Sep 18:
I appreciate this discussion if for no other reason it challenges each of us to look inward. I must admit I had always accepted the phrase "Hate the sin, love the sinner" on its face value as something that "sounded Christian" without looking for a firm scriptural foundation.
Thank you all for your informative posts that encourage me (and I hope, everyone) to look to scripture for my (our) beliefs, and thanks to Boundless for always posting on provocative issues such as these!
15. Jacob said the following at 1:03 PM on Sep 18:
"Oh yeah. Sorry to post so many times. But I have to say that this "theology of hatred" is little more than the logical outworking of the Calvinist idea that God created people just so he could watch them burn in hell forever."
Nikki, you have obviously never studied Calvinism. I would recomend that you actually read the Reformers before you continue slandering and falsely accusing them and those of us who think that what they teach is Biblical.
God loves all people? Then why won't all people go to heaven? Certainly if God is all-powerful and all-loving, he would do what is best for everyone, which is save them and send them to heaven, right? This is not only silly, but wholly unbiblical. We know that sinners do deserve God's wrath and than more than a few of them will be eternally condemned.
You put God in a box when you say that he can't/doesn't hate sinners. You are making him nice and soft in your own image. Your God does not care about sin, nor does he take his holiness seriously.
My "calvinistic box" acknowledges that God does hate sinners and does save sinners. He is holy and he is loving. He is one. We cannot set his holiness against his love. They are not against each other, for God is one, as the Scriptures teach.
God's primary attribute isn't "niceness." He commanded the destruction of entire peoples, down to their livestock, because their sin offended his holiness. I think God takes sin very seriously, and so should we.
Sinners, including ourselves, are enemies of God unless we are redeemed. Thanks be to God for Jesus Christ! Apart from him, there is no hope!
16. Jamie Morton said the following at 1:04 PM on Sep 18:
My question is whether or not the hatred of another human being can ever be for the ultimate good. That's what the fourth point means. It's not like, "Woohoo! I can finally hate someone! I've always wanted to do that!" It's "I hate this person because I believe that it will make the world a better person; I hate this person for the greater good." And I have a hard time seeing where that's even logical.
In fact, I would even argue that this perspective is unbiblical. For example, even when the Israelites are at their deepest in sin, God still loves them. He never removes himself entirely from their presence. He always extends a prophet, some form of guidance, some hand of reconciliation to them. And that is, in my opinion, loving.
Furthermore, who decides what the greater good is? What if the greater good is the advancement of the Aryan race? Does that permit the murder of Jews, blacks, homosexuals, and political enemies in the name of the greater good?
So in short, I think this is completely wrong, and extremely problematic, considering the current hate crimes legislation. We're now allowed to hate the sin AND the sinner? What kind of actions is that going to allow?
17. Carrie said the following at 1:06 PM on Sep 18:
Nikki,
As a Calvinist, I can say that John Calvin's idea of God is very from away from the idea that you described as "God created people just so he could watch them burn in hell forever."
No, He did not, as no (good) Calvinist would ever propogate such an idea!!! God created man and woman for His glory. He gave them free will and they make choices that send themselves to Hell. Who ever gave you such an idea Calvinists think "that God created people just so he could watch them burn in hell forever"?? That it utterly and totally false!!
18. Curtis said the following at 1:12 PM on Sep 18:
There is a difference between "hating the sinful quality" and "hating the sin". It's the difference between "I hate alcoholism" and "I hate the alcoholism in you." One is hatred for the sin in general and one is hatred for the instance of sin as found in a particular person.
And a reminder: we CAN (and should) have "just hatred" against ourselves. We should always be more lenient with others because of our ignorance. The problem is that often we are lenient with others and then fuss over to what extent we need to hate others.
19. Debbie said the following at 1:34 PM on Sep 18:
Maybe it helps if we talk about what real biblical godly hate is. Most of us picture hate as being "I wish you were dead" kind of hate (emotion?), which would not have anything to do with God. If He wished us dead, to suffer eternally for our sins, why would He sacrifice to the ultimate- His Son dying a cruel death- for us? So evidently biblical hate is different than how we as humans hate.
True, the Bible records many times where God has judged and people have died. Including His own chosen Israel. But, He also went to all the effort of "programming" witness of Himself even into creation so that we (all people) would see that there is a Creator, chose a folk to be a witness to the nations of Himself, sent His own Son, and now commanded the Church to tell everyone about Him.... so that we could have a relationship with Him.
So... maybe more foundational to this whole discussion should be, what is the biblical definition of hate? How does God hate? Can we as sinners copy God's hate? Can we gain any insight through the life of Christ into this "hate issue"? And what in our human views of hate (and love!) need to become more Christlike?
20. Angela said the following at 1:38 PM on Sep 18:
I have to mention this verse that God opened my eyes to when I struggled with the idea of God allowing people to go to Hell.
"On the contrary, who are you, O man, who answers back to God? The thing molded will not say to the molder, "Why did you make me like this," will it?
Or does not the potter have a right over the clay, to make from the same lump one vessel for honorable use and another for common use?
What if God, although willing to demonstrate His wrath and to make His power known, endured with much patience vessels of wrath prepared for destruction?
And He did so to make known the riches of His glory upon vessels of mercy, which He prepared beforehand for glory..."
Romans 9:20-23
As for hating the sinner, I will have to agree with Jessica's mention of Luke 10 - these are the two GREATEST commands on our lives. Though I agree that God is infinitely mysterious, I do not believe He commands us to both love our neighbor and hate him as a sinner (in which case, I would hate everyone because WE ALL are sinners - redeemed or unredeemed). I do, however, hate the sin. There is a sanctifying effect for me in loving someone who lives in blatant sin; patience, kindness and the intoxicating joy of praying for this person's repentance. If anything, I am also strengthened in my faith when I am called to speak Truth and Life into this person.
21. Samuel PG said the following at 1:56 PM on Sep 18:
Justice,
There is a problem with your statement concerning homosexuals:
"Is it truely possible to always hate the sin but not the sinner? Homosexuals view their "sin" as their identity, so in that case you cannot seperate the two."
A homosexual might view their sexuality as their identity, but that does not mean that they are correct in doing so. Many people see their jobs, their families, their significant other, or their wealth as their identity, but they are all wrong. The human identity comes from being made in the image of God.
22. Stephanie said the following at 4:27 PM on Sep 18:
If God hates anyone, he must hate me since I am *the worst* of sinners.
God has just as much right to hate me as he does to hate, say, Osama bin Ladin. No -- he has more reason to hate me since I have grown up in a Christian family exposed to the gospel since birth and am therefore more accountable that those who have not. (See Hebrews 20:26-31 and Luke 12:47-49).
God cannot hate people he created. He loves the whole world, but often loving someone means hating the way they are.
23. Sara said the following at 5:06 PM on Sep 18:
Great article! Anyone know any books/articles about how to cultivate godly hate?
24. nikki said the following at 5:23 PM on Sep 18:
Jacob: I have studied Calvinism, quite a bit actually. (Not that it's relevant, but it almost wrecked my faith.) Plenty of Calvinists have said what I did. For example, R.C. Sproul said "What predestination means, in its most elementary form, is that our final destination, heaven or hell, is decided by God...He chose some individuals to be saved...and others He chose to pass over, to allow them to follow the consequences of their sins into eternal torment in hell." I could quote Macarthur all day too, but it's all pretty much the same as this.
According to this view, human persons are created with God's full knowledge and intent that they never be saved. In other words, they are created to be damned.
Jacob, there is a vast difference between arguing that God loves everyone and saying that God is just nice and pleasant. I believe that God wants everyone to be saved, but because of the free will he chose to give us, we won't all be. It's not that no one deserves hell or that I serve a wishy washy god. I do indeed take sin seriously and I know God does as well.
I guess I would ask, if God hates someone, why would he save them? That certainly seems like it's "setting his holiness against his love." It's you, not me, who is contorting God's attributes.
25. Jacob said the following at 6:09 PM on Sep 18:
"I guess I would ask, if God hates someone, why would he save them? That certainly seems like it's "setting his holiness against his love." It's you, not me, who is contorting God's attributes."
Nikki, that is the beauty of the Gospel...while we were sinners, enemies of God, he nevertheless sends Christ to die for my sins. This does not set aside either his holiness or his love, because his wrath against me was poured out on Christ. What is it for God to pour out his wrath on Christ? His Son? It's incomprehensible why God would go to such lengths to redeem me, one who hate him, and kill Christ in my stead.
What is it to you if God choses to do what he wants with his creation? Is God unjust? Or do we apply our standards of morality to God?
26. Kevin said the following at 6:09 PM on Sep 18:
Stephanie:
"God cannot hate people he created. He loves the whole world, but often loving someone means hating the way they are."
So....did God NOT create Esau? Because the Bible says that God hated him. God loved Jacob, and He hated Esau. So if God, as you say, CANNOT hate people he created, then according to your logic God must not have created Esau. Either that or the Bible is wrong. Either way I would say the statement you made is very, very wrong and an attempt to distort the truth.
"Even from your own number men will arise and distort the truth in order to draw away disciples after them."
-Acts 20:30 (NIV)
Nikki:
"I guess I would ask, if God hates someone, why would he save them? That certainly seems like it's "setting his holiness against his love." It's you, not me, who is contorting God's attributes."
Nobody said that God hates everybody. Neither does the Bible say that. Who is to say that God cannot perfectly love and perfectly hate someone at the same time? Since when do we posess an understanding of love and hate on par with God's? Your questioning is a good thing, but maybe you should question your own view of the truth and find out how it stands with the Bible. Nobody likes to think that they might be wrong, but nobody is always right. And I'm not saying you're wrong either. I'm asking you; are you sure you're right?
27. Samuel PG said the following at 6:10 PM on Sep 18:
Without directly addressing the issues of the Calvinistic discussion, may I address those participating as a brother in Christ? I live surrounded by peers who believe very passionately either in Calvinism or Arminianism. We have held heated debates in the middle of the night, in coffee shops, on drives and in class. It is undoubtedly a fascinating topic and worth discussion.
With that said, however, I have found it to be almost impossible for those debating to treat the other position fairly. It took months of such debate until my friends and I realized that we still held our positions, but that we could each now adequately defend the opposing view. About that time we ceased to debate the topic, recognizing that both positions have strong biblical evidence and that the issue was not of such importance as to be worth dividing Christians.
I say all this because this issue so easily divides Christians and somehow brings out irrational and pejorative remarks, inspiring those debating to set up straw men and to follow red herrings. It is not worth it. If you can bring yourself into the discussion without growing angry, without speaking hatefully, without insulting those who disagree with you, then by all means enter the dialogue. It will be a blessing to you to reevaluate your own position and to learn to respect the views of those with whom you disagree. If you cannot, though, do not provide yourself with the occassion to sin and to divide the body of Christ. Remember that people on both sides of the issue are used by God to do amazing things for His kingdom, and that oftentimes those who are least involved in the debate are the same people doing the most on behalf of Christ. May we find peace
28. John said the following at 8:00 PM on Sep 18:
"Who ever gave you such an idea Calvinists think "that God created people just so he could watch them burn in hell forever"??"
Answer: Calvin, TULIP, double predestination.
Need I say more?
Okay, R.C. Sproul
I ascribe to much that Calvinism teaches, EXCEPT the non-biblical idea that God predestines people to hell or heaven. Which makes one wander how Calvinism could be so right about so many other topics yet get the GOSPEL, of all things, wrong!
29. Jacob said the following at 11:38 PM on Sep 18:
John, I wouldn't call Romans 9 non-Biblical. Don't argue with me, argue with the text.
Samuel PG,
Thanks for the reminder. Many of us Calvinists get all worked up over the misinformation and misunderstandings about what we believe that is peddled as fact by fellow Christians. Having grown up believing otherwise, I can understand where non-Calvinists are coming from, but it would be nice if some of them would put more effort into understanding what we actually believe, rather than settle for straw-man one-liners. I know I had a lot of misunderstandings about election and I was lucky enough to have a good friend and some professors in college who helped me make sense of it. Still, when the rubber hits the road, I'm not a Calvinist because I read Calvin or Sproul, but because I read the Gospel of John and the teachings of Paul and Peter.
On that note, I promise not to comment on this again!
30. Leah said the following at 12:10 AM on Sep 19:
Can I just point out to those people saying "this can't be right, because we've been commanded to love everyone/ God loves everyone": there are many things in the bible that seem to be completely opposite to each other and are in seemingly unreconcilable tension. Perhaps we should just accept that.
John- I wouldn't make such statements about things you clearly don't understand. TULIP indicates nothing about God creating people just to watch them burn in hell forever. That is the attitude of someone with a very limited, basic, uneducated understanding of what TULIP teaches.
To those saying that God doesn't hate anyone: Malachi 1:2-3 ""I have loved you," says the LORD.
"But you ask, 'How have you loved us?'
"Was not Esau Jacob's brother?" the LORD says. "Yet I have loved Jacob, 3 but Esau I have hated, and I have turned his mountains into a wasteland and left his inheritance to the desert jackals.""
"But why woudl God hate Esau over Jacob?" I hear you say. "What did Esau do?"
I'll tell you what he did- he sinned.
"But so did Jacob!"
Yes, but who are you to tell God who he can show mercy to and who he shouldn't? Are we not the clay for the potter to do with as he pleases?
Nowhere does it actually say God loves *every single person*. It says he loves *the world*. Could this not mean people from every race, language, ethnicity? Why must it mean every single individual person? And even if it does mean every single individual person, why must God save every person he loves? He doesn't. God doesn't have to save anyone. But, by his mercy, he has chosen to save some. "But why doesn't he save all?" you ask. Well, I'd ask you- "Why did he harden Pharaoh's heart? Why did he kill the entire Egyptian army in the Red Sea?" He did this so that he woudl "gain glory for (himself)" (Exodus 14:4)
It's a difficult concept for us to understand. But just because it is not comprehendable by the human mind does not make it wrong or unbiblical.
31. Leah said the following at 12:18 AM on Sep 19:
Stephanie- God does not hate us based on how sinful we are. That would mean our salvation is based on our works, not our faith. God hates everyone's sin the same. As for what determines his hatred of one person and not the other, I'm not sure. In fact, who says God's "hate" is what we think of as "hate"? The point remains, you can not be a "worse" sinner than someone else. It's not like someone who has done 10 sins is worse than someone who has done 2. Because the individual action is not the sin. It is the rebellious attitude that is the sin. These sinful actions are just manifestations of that.
Oh, and in quick addition: a quote that I find the ultimate illustration in why God is not a God of "niceness" (thanks Jacob :))
"Then (Aslan) isn't safe?" said Lucy.
"Safe?" said Mr. Beaver; "don't you hear what Mrs. Beaver tells you? Who said anything about safe? 'Course he isn't safe. But he's good. He's the King, I tell you."
God is not safe. But he is trustworthy and we know he will keep his promises.
32. Kathryn said the following at 12:40 AM on Sep 19:
I agree with Samuel PG on pretty much everything he's written in this topic.
I believe in both 100% predestination and 100% free will.
As we all believe in a Trinitarian God, why isn't it possible that free will and predestination can be both 100% true at the same time? There are many Bible verses backing both positions.
Let's not throw stones over this.
33. Rachael said the following at 1:08 AM on Sep 19:
Wow, so many posts! And what a topic! Currently I'm inclined to believe the first words of John 3:16, about God loving the world, to include everyone. Christ came for the sinners. It's the sick who need a healer. He spent time with sinners. He looked at the rich man and loved Him (Mark 10), even though the rich man did not or was not ready to do what He asked. We are called to love God with all our hearts, and our neighbors as ourselves. Now, if there are passages in the Bible that literally mean that God does hate the sinners themselves, I believe it must somehow, beyond our comprehension, be compatible with God's love. God IS love. If He hates sinners themselves, it must be that He does so without compromising his justice and love. And even if He does, are we ever commanded to hate the sinner? I don't recall any place telling us to do so, and, even if there is some kind of obsecure passage on which people base this belief, I believe that we should "judge the cloudy in light of what's clear" (I think Hank Hanegraaf said that). And it's quite clear that we are to love one another. It doesn't mean we can dismiss sin. But, if "just hate with love" is possible, I believe we as humans wouldn't know how to perform this task at all, and it might be dangerous to try. And such a belief might become a lousy excuse for people to hate people because of their sin. At the same time, though, I realize it must be tough for people to hate the sin and love the sinner, especially if the sin the person committed was directly aimed at them.
Anyway, this is becoming rambly...
34. Canadian Boy said the following at 7:59 AM on Sep 19:
I thought about this last night, and I can fully see how, from an evangelical standpoint, God hates sinners. Of course He does. He sends them to Hell, which is separation from His love. You'd have to really hate someone to do that.
35. nikki said the following at 7:59 AM on Sep 19:
"That is the beauty of the Gospel...while we were sinners, enemies of God, he nevertheless sends Christ to die for my sins. This does not set aside either his holiness or his love, because his wrath against me was poured out on Christ. What is it for God to pour out his wrath on Christ? His Son? It's incomprehensible why God would go to such lengths to redeem me, one who hate him, and kill Christ in my stead. You are now talking about us hating God, which is an interesting point in relation to this overall thread but (correct me if I'm wrong) doesn't really bear on what I was saying.
What is it to you if God choses to do what he wants with his creation? Is God unjust? Or do we apply our standards of morality to God?
Any idea I have of his love comes straight from Scripture. (Also our standard of morality -- the conscience -- comes straight from God, but that's another issue.) I am simply applying the principles I see IN SCRIPTURE to God. God can do anything he wants and I'm fine with that...unless it contradicts something I know from what God's already told me. I still have to reckon with the verses that speak of God's hate, but they don't invalidate the verses that says he loves the world, and vice versa. On the contrary, it's those of you who say he must hate us and love us at the same time, who are speaking extrabiblically. Regarding passages/principles that seem to contradict each other, (in the same way as predestination/free will) instead of saying "they both exist and even though it makes no sense, I'll accept it because to do anything else would be sassing back to the Potter." Instead we should dig deeper, and say something like "I know the bible does not contradict itself (otherwise it wouldn't be the Bible), so what am I missing in my interpretation of these two (or more) passages that would help me understand what they actually mean?" It's not that we blindly accept everything. We are supposed to interpret everything in light of all of scripture. I think it is C.S. Lewis who said, "Nonsense is still nonsense when it is talked about God."
Regarding Esau, I haven't done extensive studying by any means but I did come across this verse. Hosea 2:23 "I will show my love to the one I called 'Not my loved one.'" I think this is talking about the Gentiles, but I'm not sure. Any thoughts? Seems like it's kind of rescinding the idea of hating Esau, if that's what he's actually talking about, and I could be totally wrong. Oh yeah, and I was always taught that Esau meant the gentiles, and Jacob was Israel. Just wanted to clarify.
36. Carrie said the following at 8:31 AM on Sep 19:
"I ascribe to much that Calvinism teaches, EXCEPT the non-biblical idea that God predestines people to hell or heaven. Which makes one wander how Calvinism could be so right about so many other topics yet get the GOSPEL, of all things, wrong!"
John, so God is in control of all details except salvation???? That just doesn't make any sense.
If you have any questions about pre-destination let me tell you what I was told in my doctrine class in college. This was of great help to me in trying to sort through the issue "God sends people to hell". My doctrine professor told our class (and this is paraphrased):
"The doctrine of pre-destination is not something that should be used in evangelism. It is a doctrine of comfort. It is meant to comfort you -- God chose YOU before the foundations of the world. It should not be used to send people to Hell."
The truth of the matter is that people don't like to think about the consequences of sin. God has pre-destined an end to the world as we know it. He knows that it will all come to an end and He knows that He will have to separate the sheep from the goats. In the book of Job when Job gets angry at God, God asks him "Where were you when I created everything??!" (paraphrased). God's ways are loftier than our ways and we have no way of knowing who is saved who is not. If you believe that God is in control of everything, salvation falls under everything, so God is control of your salvation. This is meant to comfort believers. God is in control of your salvation and you are not. You need to obey and continue to work out your salvation with fear and trembling out of a loving response to your savior, but you aren't in charge of keeping your soul out of hell. God is in charge of that. This was the doctrine of pre-destination is about.
As far as God creating people to send them to Hell (which is simply wrong, that's not how God works), God doesn't withhold from people who seek Him. Yet, God also gives good things to people who don't seek Him as well. My family is a prime example of this.
Most of my family does not believe that Jesus saves. Some even abhor the idea that I can say "Jesus Christ is the way, the truth, and life". Its not like God has withheld blessing from them. He has given my family much and yet they continue to be stubborn and turn their nose up at Him. This is what sends people to Hell. He gives us a mind, will, heart, and all sorts of good things. If they choose to turn from Him, that is their choice. God gives us the freedom to run to Him or run away from Him. He knows what we will choose, but He still gives the choice.
Tangible example to help you understand the doctrine of pre-destination:
Have you ever spent time with children? What about a 2 year old? Have you ever sat down on the ground with them? Or maybe crouch down so you are eye level with them? Once you are down on their level, have you held out your arms to them so you can pick them up? What does the 2 year old do? Some times, if you are fortunate, they will gladly ask you to pick them up. They will snuggle into your neck and melt into your body. Often times, its a whole other story. They will in all likelihood start crying or say "No!" and run in the other direction. If you know your child psychology, you know that the later will happen more than the former, but you try anyhow. This is a picture of what God does with His children. God is much more purer in heart than we can ever be this side of heaven. He wants us to love Him, but often many of us choose to love something else. We can't fault God for our stubbornness.
37. Jen B said the following at 10:46 AM on Sep 19:
I realize that "hate the sin, love the sinner" is often used flippantly, yet how can we draw others to Christ if we show hatred?
"By this all people will know that you are my disciples, if you have love for one another." -John 13:35
"But if anyone has the world's goods and sees his brothers in need, yet closes his heart against him, how does God's love abide in him? Little children, let us not love in word or talk but in deed and in truth."
-I John 3:17-18
The way I interpret my Bible, as His children we are called to love others, regardless of their sin.
I agree with many of you that God's wrath and hatred are both just and righteous, yet I also believe that He loves sinners: "By this we know love, because He laid down His life for us."
"But God demonstrates His own love toward us, in that while we were still sinners, Christ died for us.'
-Romans 5:8
I understand these two verses to mean He lay down his life > out of love for us > while we were yet sinners. I agree that it is hard to reconcile this with Malachi 1:2-3, (..Esau have I hated...) yet verse 5 leaps out at me -
"Your own eyes shall see this, and you shall say, 'Great is the LORD beyond the border of Israel!'"
Our Lord, with His ways and purpose, is great beyond the narrow borders of my limited understanding. I praise Him that while He gives me the capacity to study and understand much of His law, yet I don't have to, and in fact can't, puzzle out every detail.
Lots of good discussion here! Thanks for all your insight!
38. Jen B said the following at 11:00 AM on Sep 19:
On more thought... I do appreciate the word from Samuel PG on peaceful differences (regarding election.)
I love the verse - "May the God of endurance and encouragement grant you to live in such harmony with one another, in accord with Christ Jesus, that together you may with one voice glorify the God and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ." -Romans 15:5-6
I think we often miss out on the beauty of the harmony glimpsed in this verse through "needless strivings about the law." (Titus 3:9)
It is crucial to know your faith and veiws in order to "be ready to give an answer" yet how sad when we get too caught up in our differences and forget the truth of brotherhood and oneness in Him!
Thank you for this reminder.
39. Leah said the following at 7:19 PM on Sep 19:
Jen B (and others) we are not to show hatred in the way the world thinks of hatred. Separate your mind from the world! Think of it this way- we are allowed to have righteous anger, yes? And we should be righteously angry about all sin, correct? Does this mean we run around being angry at all sinners? No. You demonstrate righteous anger differently to unrighteous anger. Just like we should demonstrate righteous hatred differently to unrighteous hatred. Unrighteous hatred, as the post indicated, is fuelled by revenge, desire for the other person's harm, and emotion. Righteous hatred is fuelled by a desire for the other person's good and for God's glory to be shown. We do not demonstrate it the way the world demonstrates its unrighteous hatred.
40. Debbie said the following at 5:03 AM on Sep 20:
Let's also get back to the discussion at hand. In my opinion, the Armenian and Calvinistic viewpoints are valid but limited human explanations of concepts that we will (possibly?) grasp when we come face to face with the living God... though, our response in His presence might sooner be, as Job, to repent and throw ourselves at His feet, and not even worry our viewpoints.
"What are your reflections on just hate?" was the original question. So, I pulled out my Bible, looked at the commands of Christ, and nowhere did I find a command to hate someone- not even an evildoer.
As to the issue of hating the sinner, a look at the original article from Justin Taylor might help. I found it a bit clearer, and not exactly the same, as Motte's summary.
Generally, there are several references that might shed a bit of light on one of the aspects of just hate:
-To avoid being too long-winded, several of the "hate" passages in the NT seem to indicate a comparative phrase, that our love for something/someone is so great that everything else pales in comparison.
-Luke 14:26. "If anyone comes to Me, and does not hate his own father and mother..." Are we to hate our parents, etc.? NO! But our commitment to Christ demands all.
-John 12:25- "he who hates his own life...", and Eph. 5:29- "noone hated his own flesh..." God has programmed self-preservation into us; but our commitment to Christ needs to go so far that we hate, sacrifice, lose, crucify self to follow Him.
-This is the best explanation (the comparative) that I have heard of the "Jacob have I loved, Esau have I hated" verses.
Romans 12:9-21 is a great passage for this discussion... verse 9 sums it up well: "Let love be without hypocrisy. Abhor what is evil; cling to what is good."
41. Jen B said the following at 5:29 PM on Sep 20:
Leah, just to clarify :)
I do see righteous anger toward sin as different from hatred toward people, sinners or not. We are called to hate our sin, (Psalm 36:2, Romans 12:9) yet I see no instance where we are to hate people. On the other hand, in Romans 9 Paul speaks of his anguish for his unsaved brethren. They were sinners - yes, yet Paul still speaks of them with love and longing for their repentance.
It doesn't change the fact that we are to hate sin. However I believe that our love for others, sinners or no, must be sincere in order to draw them toward our faith and to develop their own genuine hatred of sin.
Hope this is a little clearer. :)
Debbie, I liked your post on the comparative hatred/love phrases. Very insightful! Thank you!
42. John said the following at 7:20 PM on Sep 20:
"John, I wouldn't call Romans 9 non-Biblical. Don't argue with me, argue with the text."
Jacob, that's a good thing and good for you that you wouldn't call Romans 9 non-biblical. Congratulations. I will argue with you, however, because you are wrong. Romans 9 is right, because it is God's word, but wrong interpretations of it, like yours, are bad, mainly because you're human. You see, that's biblical too, man's sinfulness and inclination to twist God's word.
But you're more than welcome to argue with me, since I would never say argue with God's word, because that would be sin. I would however say humbly study it and ask for guidance from the Holy Spirit.
By the way, if your a Calvinist, you follow a man-made doctrine, not a biblical one.
43. John said the following at 7:28 PM on Sep 20:
"John- I wouldn't make such statements about things you clearly don't understand."
Leah
You apparently would make statements about things you clearly don't understand, because that is exactly what you do here:
"TULIP indicates nothing about God creating people just to watch them burn in hell forever. That is the attitude of someone with a very limited, basic, uneducated understanding of what TULIP teaches."
You understood that who said that exactly? Because it certainly wasn't me.
Double predestination means that people were infact created by God with no possibiblity for heaven. I never said "just watch them burn in hell forever". That is an error of accusing someone falsely.
44. John said the following at 7:34 PM on Sep 20:
"John, so God is in control of all details except salvation???? That just doesn't make any sense."
Carrie,
Why are you asking me that? I never said that. Are you mistaking what I said with some other poster?
Your post meanders all over the place. I'm not sure what your point was.
What do you mean by "control"?
45. Samuel PG said the following at 9:06 PM on Sep 20:
Leah, what would be an example of righteous hatred applied practically, though? Remember, we are not talking about righteous anger but righteous hatred. I still have a hard time thinking of an example.
46. k. said the following at 9:44 PM on Sep 20:
People are all too familiar with Christians getting their hate on. Talking about if and when we can legitimately hate sinners is kind of sad, honestly.
47. Jen B said the following at 9:30 AM on Sep 21:
I laughed when I saw my wording "sinners or no" as if there are sinless people!
It struck me as funny. :)
48. Carrie said the following at 1:44 PM on Sep 21:
I said:
"I ascribe to much that Calvinism teaches, EXCEPT the non-biblical idea that God predestines people to hell or heaven. Which makes one wander how Calvinism could be so right about so many other topics yet get the GOSPEL, of all things, wrong!"
John, so God is in control of all details except salvation???? That just doesn't make any sense.
By control I mean "has a grip on".
Are you the John that said "I ascribe to much that Calvinism teaches, EXCEPT the non-biblical idea that God predestines people to hell or heaven. Which makes one wander how Calvinism could be so right about so many other topics yet get the GOSPEL, of all things, wrong!" ??
My point was that it is impossible for not not to be in control of salvation. If God did not predestine salvation, then he is not in charge of it. Nothing is out of the plan/destination of God. My point of the 2 year old analogy was that God wants us to come to Him, but like a 2 year old we are often stubborn. He did give us the freedom to be stubborn towards salvation. He desires that all may turn to Him, but we aren't His little robots. Calvinism teaches this "non-robotic" response to God's calling to our souls.
Is more clarity needed??
49. John said the following at 5:49 PM on Sep 21:
"Is more clarity needed??"
Yes, Carrie, apparently you do need more clarity...on Calvinism.
Calvinism does NOT teach that we have a choice. That's why your analogy doesn't make sense, since what you described was exactly what Calvinism states as not being possible, us denying OR accepting salvation. According to Calvanism, God made some for heaven and others for hell. This is "predetermined", meaning nobody has a choice, which is exactly the robotic response to God's call on our souls!
Which is wholly unbiblical!
50. Leah said the following at 7:37 AM on Sep 22:
John- no, you didn't say those words, but you agreed with them.
"Who ever gave you such an idea Calvinists think "that God created people just so he could watch them burn in hell forever"??"
Answer: Calvin, TULIP, double predestination.
You also accuse Jacob of propagating misinterpretations of Romans 9. How about we stop using the words "calvinist" and "calvinism", because
a) Calvin would roll over in his grave if he heard that and
b) He did not start these concepts, he simply taught them (ie. people were teaching these concepts before him) and
c) those terms were not coined until well after his death and were not started by him.
If Jacob was so unbiblical in his interpretation of Romans 9, how did a synod of 100 theologians refute Arminius's theology in favour of Calvin's? How do people, who have never been taught anything of TULIP, read Romans 9 (and other places) and discover these things for themselves?
By the way, if your a Calvinist, you follow a man-made doctrine, not a biblical one.
Man-made? By who? Calvin? Because you'd be wrong.
I may as well just say that if you're an Arminian, you follow a man-made doctrine. Because that's an awful lot more proveable then the reverse. But if I said that, you'd just dismiss me, wouldn't you? You can't seriously expect any "Calvinist" to pay any serious attention to you by saying those types of things.
Samuel PG- I know we're not talking about righteous anger. I differentiated between the two, didn't I? I don't know how it would be applied practically. But I have to admit, the theory certainly works. I do know, however, that we shouldn't hate as the world hates. Because that is a desire for revenge and hurt inflicted up on the other person. I would put forward that we can righteously hate and love sinners. It seems to me that righteous hatred is not the hatred that the world propagates (and supposedly puts in direct opposition to love). I'm not saying that's all gospel, just saying it's how it appears to me.
51. Leah said the following at 8:44 AM on Sep 24:
John, it's not a 'robotic response', go and read Romans 9.
52. Carrie said the following at 11:01 AM on Sep 24:
I am a Calvinist, I go to a church that subscribes to Calvinism, and I learned doctrine at a college that belongs to a denomination that subscribes to Calvinism. I took all my Bible classes from professors that subscribe to Calvinism. Calvinism does, most certainly, teach that humans have free will and make decisions that are just plain sinful and apart from the ordinances of God.
God has set apart a people unto Himself. Yet, we can't fully know the mind of God. Therefore we are to go preach the Gospel and baptize in the name of the Father, Son, and Holy Ghost. There are people who will not get to heaven, but we don't the have ability to know such things.
We have a responsibility to preach to Gospel to that the lost may be saved. This is how God brings glory to Himself. God brings glory to himself by using sinful, human agents. We could just sit on our tushies and do nothing, but doing nothing is doing something. As image-bearers of the triune Godhead, we can't not evangelize.
How sad it would be for me to think that God didn't pre-determine your salvation before the foundations of the world!
53. Kathryn said the following at 8:28 PM on Sep 24:
Also want to add Ephesians 1:3-14 to the places where predestination crops up.
54. rivergreg said the following at 2:40 AM on Sep 25:
John, Carrie, Leah, et al,
I think the impasse in the discussion is centering around the doctrine of Irresistible Grace, or as it is often termed these days, Effectual Calling. It means, in a nutshell, that when God extends His specific calling to a sinner whom He has sovereignly chosen, the sinner will indeed respond by choosing Christ, having been regenerated ("monergism" - God is the only active element in regeneration; our involvement is purely a response to that regeneration). I wouldn't use the term "robotic" for that response, but the response is indeed guaranteed by God's grace, according to the "I" in TULIP. "Robotic" and "guaranteed" are not the same thing :) It's much like James chapter 2 -- true faith will guarantee the presence of works. Those works aren't "robotic" ;) but they are guaranteed!
I will say that my own salvation experience, though I was quite young and my memories are somewhat limited, makes a pretty good argument for Irresistible Grace. I responded to God's call, and even though I did choose to respond, it was almost like I didn't have a choice in the matter :) Hard to explain, I guess.
That said, I personally don't subscribe to the doctrine of Irresistible Grace. It seems logical, given that God does choose (doctrine of Election, per Romans 9 et al). I just don't see the doctrine of Irresistible Grace (and of Limited Atonement / Particular Redemption) lining up with scripture. Admittedly, TULIP is a nice, logical set of doctrines that seem to make a lot of sense of a difficult-to-understand subject. If I could see how it, in its entirety, lines up with Scripture I'd believe TULIP wholeheartedly :) But as is, I believe that this area of discussion is one of the greatest mysteries of our faith - how it all works together. I am content for it to remain a mystery as such, and not have to "reason away" various verses in scripture; rather than tidying it all up into a nice neat doctrine while (in my best understanding at present) letting certain scriptures fall by the wayside.
A closing thought -- the term Predestination is not the best one to use in this context. It conjures up images of "Destination: Heaven" or "Destination: Hell". That's not how the term is used in scripture.
55. John said the following at 5:26 AM on Sep 25:
How sad it would be to think that God pre-determined some to go to hell and others to heaven before the foundation of the world!
56. John said the following at 9:09 AM on Sep 25:
"John, it's not a 'robotic response', go and read Romans 9."
Exactly, salvation is not a robotic response, which is in agreement with scripture.
Calvinism teaches the opposite, that it is a robotic response.
We agree then?
57. Carrie said the following at 10:01 AM on Sep 25:
rivergreg -- I agree.
John -- I still disagree. I still disagree because Calvanism does not teach that salvation is a "robotic" response. rivergreg said "I wouldn't use the term 'robotic' for that response, but the response is indeed guaranteed by God's grace . . ."
You keep claiming that the school of Calvinistic thought teaches things that it does not teach. Yes, people twist and turn terms to mean things that they don't mean, but as rivergreg pointed out "A closing thought -- the term Predestination is not the best one to use in this context. It conjures up images of 'Destination: Heaven' or 'Destination: Hell'. That's not how the term is used in scripture."
Maybe I and other "pre-destination" advocates on this forum have been misusing the term. However, we are trying to advocate the biblical doctrine that is taught in in Ephesians 1. Thank you Kathryn for pointing the discussion towards this piece of Scripture.
John, read Ephesians 1 and the book of Job and then explain to me how it is possible "that God" did not "pre-determined some to go to hell and others to heaven before the foundation of the world."
I by no means am trying to convince you that this is easy to accept. Understanding God and His ways is no walk in the park. However, to think that salvation is something we enter into completely apart from God's wonderful plan is selling Him a little short in the foreknowledge department.
58. Katie P. said the following at 10:37 AM on Sep 25:
I totally agree with Samuel PG. John, Carrie, and others: it really doesn't look like either one of you are going to change your mind :) Of course, this is coming from a settled Calvminian, who doesn't think that she will ever know exactly how it all works...
59. John said the following at 12:35 PM on Sep 25:
Calvinism teaches predestination.
Predestination means no choice.
No choice means robotic.
Calvinism teaches a robotic response to salvation.
Calvinism is a man made doctrine.
It's teachings on salvation are not biblical.
No reading of the bible is necessary to find it, because it is not there.
"However, to think that salvation is something we enter into completely apart from God's wonderful plan is selling Him a little short in the foreknowledge department."
Who thinks that we enter into salvation completely apart from God's wonderful plan?
And what does that have to do with foreknowledge?
60. Carrie said the following at 1:53 PM on Sep 25:
I should take the higher road and disengage . . . . but I'm choosing not to and God knew as much 10,000 years ago.
Calvinism teaches predestination.
True
Predestination means no choice.
False, See the first sentence of this post.
No choice means robotic.
True.
Calvinism teaches a robotic response to salvation.
False. I have never been told to "be a robot" and that I "had no choice" in whether or not I was saved. Remember, I've been schooled in Calvinistic thought. I have been told that a choice is a choice is a choice. I chose Jesus, but God knew I was going to.
Calvinism is a man made doctrine.
False. See Ephesians 1.
It's teachings on salvation are not biblical.
False. See Ephesians 1 and Job.
No reading of the bible is necessary to find it, because it is not there.
False. See Ephesians 1, Job, and Romans 9.
"However, to think that salvation is something we enter into completely apart from God's wonderful plan is selling Him a little short in the foreknowledge department."
Who thinks that we enter into salvation completely apart from God's wonderful plan?
You seem to think this because, according to you, God didn't know yesterday who would accept Jesus today.
And what does that have to do with foreknowledge?
If there is something God doesn't know, then how and why would I trust Him to keep His promises??
One more question, and I mean this in all sincerity since you believe that God doesn't plan who is going to heaven and hell. My parents aren't Christians. They reject the notion that "Jesus saves". I see no evidence that they desire to believe in Him. If things keep on their current, they will die as unbelievers. Now, I love my parents dearly, but I can't save them. Only God can change their hearts.
My question:If they do indeed dies as unbelievers, what hope do I have if I were to believe that God hadn't planned such an event? If I do not believe that God works all things for His glory, then after my parents die I would feel responsible for things that are not my concern. Yes, I am responsible to be a Christian witness and to live a holy and blameless life, but this isn't what saves a person. If my testimony isn't enough, then what?? Does God send me to hell for failing to convert them?? I don't think so because He had a plan which included that my parents would not be saved. If they die as unbelievers, will I be upset? Of course!! Should I mourn their unbelief? Yes!! Is their unbelief something that is outside of God's control?? No! God can change their hearts and only He knows if He will. In the mean time I have to draw closer and closer to Him so that He may work in order to save them (if that's part of His plan). If He doesn't save them, then I have to continue to trust Him so that I may not lose faith.
61. Kyu said the following at 2:44 PM on Sep 25:
After reading all of these posts, I'm trying to understand how knowledge of this difficult topic (or lack thereof) translates to acting out our faith in real life.
Paul addresses both the elect AND the unsaved in a span of two chapters in Romans.
If you are saved today (all of us that are "PREDESTINED" or "PROGRAMMED" or "FOREKNOWN" or the “PRIVILEGED FEW” or given "IRRESISTIBLE GRACE" by God before we were even born; whichever terminology you choose), Paul warns us to "not to be arrogant but afraid" (Rom 11:20), and to "continue to work out your salvation with fear and trembling" (Phil 2:12). "For if God did not spare the natural branches, he will not spare you either" (Rom 11:21). [And Paul here is referring to those of us that have ALREADY BEEN grafted in ('saved'). I don’t want to get into the discussion here on whether or not you can ‘lose’ your salvation]. Therefore, let's continue to run the race! We still have to cross the finish line on our own two feet. Many of us fall into the trap of complacency thinking that we're set for all eternity and we can afford to shower in God's grace and mercy for the rest of our lives (which is probably what many of the Roman Gentiles were falling into; hence, Paul’s letter). Paul is warning us exactly about the potential pitfalls related to predestination / principle of the elect.
If you are NOT saved today, you can make the choice TODAY to accept the Word that is near your heart. Only at the end of the age will we know those that have intentionally rejected God's Word and were "PREDISPOSED" or "PREDESTINED" to go to hell [ie, Esau, Pharaoh**]. But from a human perspective, that’s after the fact (after we all die). Predestination is a concept for God that we humans cannot easily conceptualize in the present. We don’t live in His dimension! [But even so, what’s the point? Are we going to sit around guessing who is predestined?]. We live in a 3-D world and God revealed to us only a fraction of what’s really out there. Unfortunately many unbelievers (and believers) nonchalantly toss that term around and use it as an excuse for their inaction and continue to ignore the signs and wonders that come their way for the salvation of their souls. At this time, only God knows who those “PREDESTINED” folks are; it’s not our position to think in place of God; hence, His instructions for worldwide missions and evangelism. God will hold us (we the limited and finite human beings bound by time) accountable for the opportunities that come to us TODAY. If I was like God and I knew that I was born to go to hell, of course I would not make any effort to receive salvation. But the whole point here is that I don't know what He knows. Instead of sitting back trying to figure out today if I'm one of the elect, I have the ability to act and receive grace. Paul addresses the unbelieving fatalists in the preceding chapter: "For there is no difference between Jew and Gentile—the same Lord is Lord of all and richly blesses all who call on him, for, "Everyone who calls on the name of the Lord will be saved" (Rom 10:12-13). Fatalists fall into the trap of thinking that they were the unfortunate ones destined for hell because they have not yet met God at this point in their lives, and so they dig themselves into complacency the other way. To the unbelievers, let’s leave the predestination issue to God and wrestle with the issue that is presented to us today:
“Now what I am commanding you today is not too difficult for you or beyond your reach. It is not up in heaven, so that you have to ask, "Who will ascend into heaven to get it and proclaim it to us so we may obey it?" Nor is it beyond the sea, so that you have to ask, "Who will cross the sea to get it and proclaim it to us so we may obey it?" No, the word is very near you; it is in your mouth and in your heart so you may obey it. (Deut. 30:11-14).
** Bible mentions that God “hardened Pharaoh’s heart.” Moses, as the probable author, witnessed all of these events. He witnessed God’s sovereignty when manna was rained down from heaven, water poured out of a rock, and the Red Sea was divided. From his perspective, God had a hand in EVERYTHING, including Pharaoh’s heart. Looking back, Moses saw that God used Pharaoh’s consistent stubbornness to demonstrate His power over nature. What characterized Pharaoh’s life was consistent disobedience to God over and over again. Then he died. To an Israelite, all Pharaoh was good for was the fact that God used his disobedience to display His glory. Therefore, “God raised up Pharaoh for that very purpose.” God knew in advance that Pharaoh would “choose” for himself to be the exact stubborn type that was necessary to fulfill His purposes. What most of us are uncomfortable with is the fact that even though God knew Pharaoh would be stubborn, He created him anyway. Why create something that He knows would be ‘bad’ and doomed to failure? But that’s the whole nature of sin. He didn’t create human beings to be bad, but because of sin, we make many ‘bad’ choices. God placed us in the world knowing that we would be sinful, and yet, we’ll all have a CHANCE at redemption today, just like Pharaoh did time and time again [it just doesn’t seem like Pharaoh had much of a fighting chance because we’re reading about it couple of thousands of years after the fact; therefore, it’s a simple foregone conclusion to us]. In the same way that God allows His own creation to kill other creation or allowed Eve to eat from the tree via free will (which is inherently core to our identity as human beings; a robotic human being is a contradiction; forced/preprogrammed love is also a contradiction), He simply let Pharaoh’s disobedient parents conceive him, and raise him to be a stubborn boy. And yes, in essence, for a sovereign God, He did ‘allow’ Pharaoh to come into existence by not interfering with the process, so you may say He’s indirectly responsible. But that’s the God we worship. He gives His creation the free will to conceive disobedient children who wreak havoc in this world. In this case, God knew Pharaoh’s heart even before he was born, and He decided to make Israel’s liberation coincide with an obstinate Pharaoh that He apparently (to us) “raised for that very purpose”. God’s sovereignty works alongside His people who can act freely to choose good or bad.
62. John said the following at 7:39 PM on Sep 25:
Carrie,
You're confusing foreknowledge with predestination. You have a linear view of cause and effect. Think of it more as a network in 4 dimensions.
Foreknowledge and predestination are two different things. Just because God knows all future possibilities doesn't mean He forces us to choose Him, which is what Calvinism states. (double predestination and total depravity)
Calvinism is a man made doctrine. It's called Calvinism after Calvin, a man, who developed this doctrine based on his interpretation of scripture, hence, a man made doctrine.
God is working to save everyone, all the time. It is in His plan that the entire world would be saved. Sadly, because He gives us freedom to choose, many will not choose Him.
That is the truest definition of love, true love cannot be forced, forced love is no love at all.
63. John said the following at 7:46 PM on Sep 25:
God also knew that Pharaoh would NOT be so stubborn and would NOT chase Moses.
64. Carrie said the following at 8:02 AM on Sep 26:
"That is the truest definition of love, true love cannot be forced, forced love is no love at all."
Finally we agree on something!! God doesn't "force us" to love Him, Calvinism doesn't teach that. The school of thought of "Calvinism" is named after Calvin because Calvin was one of the reformers. He helped people see that the Catholic church was getting it right and that Scripture had much more to say than what the Church was telling its members.
Was Plato the one who discovered "Platonic love"? No, he was just he first one to come along, develop the idea, and put a label to it. The same idea is true of Calvinism, he didn't invent the doctrine of Total Depravity, Unconditional election, Limited Atonement, Irresistable Grace, and Perseverance of the Saints. He just organized and labeled the ideas for the rest of us.
Irresistable Grace -- I think of Irresistable Grace as a day of picture perfect weather. You see it from your window and you just have to go out and enjoy it. You run, ride a bike, swim, or anything else that gets you outside in order to enjoy the day to the fullest. You bask in the sunlight and everything is clear. Nobody is forcing you to go outside, but you are compelled to for reasons you may not fully understand.
Total depravity can be found in "the Roman Road": "all our righteousness is as filthy rags". Also, Paul teaches that all men "are without excuse". We can't make it heaven on our own merit. Surely you must agree to this, otherwise Jesus would be very unattractive.
I'm glad that we finally agreed on something.
65. John said the following at 7:23 PM on Sep 26:
Calvinism is a man made doctrine, whether Calvin first made it or just organized it.
Calvinism teaches that we don't have a choice.
You still have not addressed the fact that you confuse foreknowledge with predistination.
66. Carrie said the following at 8:11 PM on Sep 26:
edit:
"He helped people see that the Catholic church was not getting it right . . ."
67. Carrie said the following at 7:24 AM on Sep 27:
I see the two as intertwined. I don't think I'm confusing them. One can't exist without the other.
If Calvin just organized it, how is it man made?? That doesn't make sense.
Another analogy (sorry, I think in analogies): Saying Calvinism is a man made doctrine is like saying I made my closet because I put my clothes away. Calvin didn't invent anything or make anything new that wasn't in Scripture already. He just simply pointed it out. He didn't add to Scripture or take anything away. He worked with what was there.
68. John said the following at 5:51 PM on Sep 27:
Calvinism is an interpretation of scripture, not scripture.
Foreknowledge is absolutely different from predestination.
69. Carrie said the following at 5:56 PM on Sep 27:
Could you please explain Romans 8:28-31 for me, if these two concepts are not intertwined?
70. Leah said the following at 6:31 PM on Sep 27:
John: in regards to the Egyptian thing: it was not a matter of God "foreknowing" what Pharaoh would do. Exodus says quite plainly that God actively hardened Pharaoh's heart- and then killed him and his men in the Red Sea.
71. John said the following at 5:37 PM on Sep 28:
Yes, God hardened Pharaoh's heart, but it didn't have to happen that way. And, it could have stopped before all ten plaques and the drowning in the Red Sea.
I would also be careful saying that God "killed" him and his men, because, what God actually did, was save His people from certain death, which resulted in Pharaoh and his men dying because of Pharaoh's stubborness.
On top of that, just because God chose to act in history with such a degree of intervention, doesn't mean that's how He always works. God has not predestined people to hell and others to heaven.
Foreknowledge is knowing all the future, not forcing future, which is predestination.
72. Carrie said the following at 9:01 PM on Sep 29:
John, you still haven't explained parts of Scripture that several of us have pointed out that explicitly state that God predestines individuals to salvation.
You keep saying that God doesn't do something that Scripture explicitly states that He does indeed do.
I'm still very confused how you can continue to deny such things.
73. John said the following at 3:12 PM on Sep 30:
There are no scriptures that say God predestines people to hell and others to heaven.
Show me them, I will address them.
And you still confuse foreknowledge with predistination. They are two different things.
74. Carrie said the following at 9:01 AM on Oct 1:
I have pointed them out several times and you keep saying "it doesn't exist". I guess we are at an impass if you continue you walk around the elephant in the room and keep yelling "there is no elephant!!".
75. John said the following at 4:53 PM on Oct 1:
Carrie,
Write the verses that you think say that God predestines people to hell and heaven.
I will show you how they don't.
76. Carrie said the following at 10:35 AM on Oct 9:
I must be a glutton for punishment or I really enjoy beating a dead horse.
I will repeat what I said in my last post "I have pointed them out several times and you keep saying 'it doesn't exist'."
So, scroll up, look at the references already given and respond. Please. Thank you.