True or False?

God loves everyone the same.

 

By Errol Hale

 

 

The following two verses seem to say that God hates sinners:

 

"Those who are of a perverse heart are an abomination to the LORD, But the blameless in their ways are His delight."    --Proverbs 11:20

 

"The boastful shall not stand in Your sight; You hate all workers of iniquity."     --Psalm 5:5

 

How can this be?  Isn't God love, and doesn't he love everyone?  Read on...

 

Doesn't John 3:16 say, "God so loved the world that He gave His only begotten Son that whoever believes on Him will not perish but have everlasting life."?

There are three ways of answering this question.  Two are correct, one is incorrect.  First the two correct answers:

Number One: "Yes, God loves the world, but the word world does not refer to every man woman and child on the planet, any more than Luke 2:1 means that every person on the planet was registered in the Caesar Augustus' census."  The "whole world" in Luke 2:1 refers to the "Roman world." Context reveals the extent of the term "world."  Jesus' words in John 3:16 were spoken to Nicodemus, a Pharisee.  Pharisees believed that salvation was for the Jews only.  Jesus was explaining to Nicodemus that salvation was not exclusively for the Jews, but for everyone in the world who believes.  The first explanation, therefore, is that the "world" in John 3:16 (and in other places, including 1 John 2:2) refers to the inclusion of non-Jews.

Number Two: "Yes, God loves the world, but His love for the reprobate (those who will ultimately reject Jesus Christ and end up lost) is different from His love for the elect (those who will ultimately receive Jesus Christ and end up saved.)"  Psalm 145 says, "The Lord is good to all; and His tender mercies are over all His works...[He] satisfies the desire of every living thing." 

From this and many verses like it, we can see clearly that God loves sinners and He demonstrates that love by broadcasting His common grace to all.  What else was Jesus referring to when He said "for He makes His sun rise on the evil and on the good, and sends rain on the just and on the unjust" (Matthew 5:45)?

Theologically speaking, we would say that God confers "common grace" to all men, including the reprobate (those who are ultimately unsaved), but His "redemptive grace" is given only to the elect (those who ultimately are saved). Scripture declares this to be so.  Besides Proverbs 11:20 and Psalm 5:5 cited in the beginning of this paper, consider Romans 9:13-15.  It says, "As it is written, 'Jacob I have loved, but Esau I have hated.'  What shall we say then? Is there unrighteousness with God? Certainly not!  For He says to Moses, 'I will have mercy on whomever I will have mercy, and I will have compassion on whomever I will have compassion.'"

In this passage (v.11) God declares that He loved Jacob and hated Esau before the boys were even born! This demonstrates first that God's love is not dependent on what we do, but on God's sovereign choice to be compassionate as He wills.  It further demonstrates that God loves some and hates others.

Number Three: "Yes, God loves all people alike, saints and sinners, the elect and the reprobate."  This answer is incorrect.  Why?  How can God love a person condemned to hell with the exact same love with which He loves those He saves, glorifies and receives into heaven?  He can't.  The distinction between common and redemptive grace is supremely important at this point.

One of the most frequently repeated objections to this is that preaching the gospel to those who will end up reprobate is superfluous. The reasoning is that we cannot tell people that God loves them because we do not know if they are among the elect or among the reprobate.  This should never be a problem.  While we cannot guarantee that everyone we share the gospel with will be saved, and therefore that they are to be the recipients of God's redemptive grace, we can truthfully proclaim God's love for them first on the basis of God's common grace.  Beyond that, we are commanded to preach the gospel (Mark 16:15-16, Luke 24:47, 1 Timothy 2:4) irrespective of how those who hear the gospel respond to it.  We must therefore proclaim the free offer of the gospel to all men as though all men are elected to salvation precisely because we do not know who is.

While the blood of Christ is certainly sufficient to save all men from their sins, it is efficient only to save those who receive Christ.  If Christ actually died for all men, suffering God's wrath for all men, then those who end up lost will suffer God's wrath a second time, making God unjust by demanding double payment and making Jesus' suffering in vain.

 

WHAT DIFFERENCE DOES THIS MAKE?

First, accepting this biblical teaching, whether we fully understand it or not, provides insight into the character of God.  God is love, but because God is also righteous, He loves righteousness.  He cannot love unrighteousness.  He must hate it.  This doctrine highlights these two attributes of God that are never at odds with each other.

Second, because we do not know who will end up receiving Christ, we must preach the gospel and call all men to repent, knowing that God will save His elect.

 

 

A related issue concerns the scope of redemption.  The question is:  "Did Christ die for all sinners or only for the elect?"

John Owen, the Puritan Divine addressed the issue in this manner:*

The Father imposed His wrath due unto, and the Son underwent punishment for, either:

1.     Some of the sins of all men.

2.     All the sins of some men, or

3.     All the sins of all men.

In which case it may be said:

a.     If the first be true, all men have some sins to answer for, and so none are saved.

b.     But if the second be true, then Christ, in their stead suffered for all the sins of the elect in the whole world, and this is true.

c.     If the third be the case, why are not all men free from the punishment due unto their sins?

You answer, "Because of unbelief."

I ask, "Is this unbelief a sin, or is it not?" 

You say, "Yes, it is sin."

I reply, "If it be a sin, then Christ suffered the punishment due unto it, or He did not.  If He did, why must that hinder them more than their other sins for which He died?  If He did not, He did not die for all their sins!"

 

*  Owen was not addressing universalists.  He was addressing those who say that Jesus died for all, but some of those He died for end up lost.

 

e:\literature\factsheets\love_sinr.doc v.2.0 2/2002