Posted on 08/01/2005 8:16:45 PM PDT by buckeyesrule
Does God So Love the World?
by: John MacArthur
Love is the best known but least understood of all God's attributes. Almost everyone who believes in God these days sees Him as a God of love. I have even met agnostics who are quite certain that if God exists, He must be benevolent, compassionate, and loving.
All those things are infinitely true about God, of course, but not in the way most people think. Because of the influence of modern liberal theology, many suppose that God's love and goodness ultimately nullify His righteousness, justice, and holy wrath. They envision God as a benign heavenly grandfather-tolerant, affable, lenient, permissive, devoid of any real displeasure over sin, who without consideration of His holiness will benignly pass over sin and accept people as they are.
Liberal thinking about God's love also permeates much of evangelicalism today. We have lost the reality of God's wrath. We have disregarded His hatred for sin. The God most evangelicals now describe is all-loving and not at all angry. We have forgotten that "It is a terrifying thing to fall into the hands of the living God" (Hebrews 10:31). We do not believe in that kind of God anymore.
We must recapture some of the holy terror that comes with a right understanding of God's righteous anger. We need to remember that God's wrath does burn against impenitent sinners (Psalm 38:1-3). That reality is the very thing that makes His love so amazing. Only those who see themselves as sinners in the hands of an angry God can fully appreciate the magnitude and wonder of His love.
In that regard, our generation is surely at a greater disadvantage than any previous age. We have been force-fed the doctrines of self-esteem for so long that most people don't really view themselves as sinners worthy of divine wrath. On top of that, religious liberalism, humanism, evangelical compromise, and ignorance of the Scriptures have all worked against a right understanding of who God is. Ironically, in an age that conceives of God as wholly loving, altogether devoid of wrath, few people really understand what God's love is all about.
How we address the misconception of the present age is crucial. We must not respond to an overemphasis on divine love by denying that God is love. Our generation's imbalanced view of God cannot be corrected by an equal imbalance in the opposite direction, a very real danger in some circles. I'm deeply concerned about a growing trend I've noticed-particularly among people committed to the biblical truth of God's sovereignty and divine election. Some of them flatly deny that God in any sense loves those whom He has not chosen for salvation.
I am troubled by the tendency of some-often young people newly infatuated with Reformed doctrine-who insist that God cannot possibly love those who never repent and believe. I encounter that view, it seems, with increasing frequency.
The argument inevitably goes like this: Psalm 7:11 tells us "God is angry with the wicked every day." It seems reasonable to assume that if God loved everyone, He would have chosen everyone unto salvation. Therefore, God does not love the non-elect. Those who hold this view often go to great lengths to argue that John 3:16 cannot really mean God loves the whole world.
Perhaps the best-known argument for this view is found the unabridged edition of an otherwise excellent book, The Sovereignty of God, by A. W. Pink. Pink wrote, "God loves whom He chooses. He does not love everybody." [1] He further argued that the word world in John 3:16 ("For God so loved the world…") "refers to the world of believers (God's elect), in contradistinction from 'the world of the ungodly.'"[2]
Pink was attempting to make the crucial point that God is sovereign in the exercise of His love. The gist of his argument is certainly valid: It is folly to think that God loves all alike, or that He is compelled by some rule of fairness to love everyone equally. Scripture teaches us that God loves because He chooses to love (Deuteronomy 7:6-7), because He is loving (God is love, 1 John 4:8), not because He is under some obligation to love everyone the same.
Nothing but God's own sovereign good pleasure compels Him to love sinners. Nothing but His own sovereign will governs His love. That has to be true, since there is certainly nothing in any sinner worthy of even the smallest degree of divine love.
Unfortunately, Pink took the corollary too far. The fact that some sinners are not elected to salvation is no proof that God's attitude toward them is utterly devoid of sincere love. We know from Scripture that God is compassionate, kind, generous, and good even to the most stubborn sinners. Who can deny that those mercies flow out of God's boundless love? It is evident that they are showered even on unrepentant sinners.
We must understand that it is God's very nature to love. The reason our Lord commanded us to love our enemies is "in order that you may be sons of your Father who is in heaven; for He causes His sun to rise on the evil and the good, and sends rain on the righteous and the unrighteous" (Matthew 5:45). Jesus clearly characterized His Father as One who loves even those who purposefully set themselves at enmity against Him.
At this point, however, an important distinction must be made: God loves believers with a particular love. God's love for the elect is an infinite, eternal, saving love. We know from Scripture that this great love was the very cause of our election (Ephesians 2:4). Such love clearly is not directed toward all of mankind indiscriminately, but is bestowed uniquely and individually on those whom God chose in eternity past.
But from that, it does not follow that God's attitude toward those He did not elect must be unmitigated hatred. Surely His pleading with the lost, His offers of mercy to the reprobate, and the call of the gospel to all who hear are all sincere expressions of the heart of a loving God. Remember, He has no pleasure in the death of the wicked, but tenderly calls sinners to turn from their evil ways and live.
Reformed theology has historically been the branch of evangelicalism most strongly committed to the sovereignty of God. At the same time, the mainstream of Reformed theologians have always affirmed the love of God for all sinners. John Calvin himself wrote regarding John 3:16, "[Two] points are distinctly stated to us: namely, that faith in Christ brings life to all, and that Christ brought life, because the Father loves the human race, and wishes that they should not perish." [3]
Calvin continues to explain the biblical balance that both the gospel invitation and "the world" that God loves are by no means limited to the elect alone. He also recognized that God's electing, saving love is uniquely bestowed on His chosen ones.
Those same truths, reflecting a biblical balance, have been vigorously defended by a host of Reformed stalwarts, including Thomas Boston, John Brown, Andrew Fuller, W. G. T. Shedd, R. L. Dabney, B. B. Warfield, John Murray, R. B. Kuiper, and many others. In no sense does belief in divine sovereignty rule out the love of God for all humanity.
We are seeing today, in some circles, an almost unprecedented interest in the doctrines of the Reformation and the Puritan eras. I'm very encouraged by that in most respects. A return to those historic truths is, I'm convinced, absolutely necessary if the church is to survive. Yet there is a danger when overzealous souls misuse a doctrine like divine sovereignty to deny God's sincere offer of mercy to all sinners.
We must maintain a carefully balanced perspective as we pursue our study of God's love. God's love cannot be isolated from His wrath and vice versa. Nor are His love and wrath in opposition to each other like some mystical yin-yang principle. Both attributes are constant, perfect, without ebb or flow. His wrath coexists with His love; therefore, the two never contradict. Such are the perfections of God that we can never begin to comprehend these things. Above all, we must not set them against one another, as if there were somehow a discrepancy in God.
Both God's wrath and His love work to the same ultimate end-His glory. God is glorified in the condemnation of the wicked; He is glorified in every expression of love for all people without exception; and He is glorified in the particular love He manifests in saving His people.
Expressions of wrath and expressions of love-all are necessary to display God's full glory. We must never ignore any aspect of His character, nor magnify one to the exclusion of another. When we commit those errors, we throw off the biblical balance, distort the true nature of God, and diminish His real glory.
Does God so love the world? Emphatically-yes! Proclaim that truth far and wide, and do so against the backdrop of God's perfect wrath that awaits everyone who does not repent and turn to Christ.
Does the love of God differ in the breadth and depth and manner of its expression? Yes it does. Praise Him for the many manifestations of His love, especially toward the non-elect, and rejoice in the particular manifestation of His saving love for you who believe. God has chosen to display in you the glory of His redeeming grace.
[1]Arthur W. Pink, The Sovereignty of God (Grand Rapids: Baker, 1930), 29-30.
[2]Ibid., 314.
[3]John Calvin, Commentary on a Harmony of the Evangelists, Matthew, Mark, and Luke, William Pringle, trans. (Grand Rapids: Baker, 1979 reprint), 123.
Adapted from The God Who Loves © 2001 by John MacArthur. All rights reserved.
• Grace to You (Thursday, July 21, 2005)
Brought to you by OnePlace.com.
Yes, BUT...you and I differ on where He stops, how successful He is, and why belief happens.
The simplest situation I can use to demonstrate the major difference between our positions is the Scriptures themselves. You and I both believe (I assume) that God did not write the Scriptures for the original authors, did not force them to write them, and did not dictate it to them. I have complete faith in the Scriptures because I have complete faith that, though they were written in the words and language of the original authors, they were inspired by God in such a way as they are 100% infallible and perfect. IOW, God was able to efficaciously bring about what He purposed without violating the will of the authors.
I likewise believe that God can efficaciously bring about faith in whomever He purposes, whereas you do not.
Why is there even a waterfall of destruction?
No, actually they would insist that reprobates are floating face down in the water drowned already.
How God "loves" is impossible for us to understand because He does not love in the emotional sense that we view love. His love is infinite, immutable, eternal. I believe that God loves his creatures as a reflection of Himself. His Glory is displayed in His works. I believe that He has a particular love for those in whom the Holy Spirit lives because they are an even better reflection of His Glory.
Is their experience of that love the same? No - definitely not. To paraphrase, the measure (of your heart) you give effects the measure (of enjoying the blessedness of God's love) you receive.
This part of your post is very interesting. I believe that the reason why John called himself the disciple that Jesus loved is not because he thought that Jesus loved him more than Peter or the other disciples, but rather, that John was overwhelmed that Jesus would love him at all.
Your thoughts?
Thanks for asking.
Then there is no genuine offer of salvation and MacArthur is obviously wrong about the offer of salvation being a demonstration of his love toward the reprobates.
Throwing a rope to a man who cannot grab it, either because he has no arms or because he is already drowned, would be a demonstration of cruelty and/or contempt. Certainly it would not be a demonstation of love. If MacArthur believes as you do, then his claim that the offer of salvation to the reprobates is a demonstration of God's love is ludicrous.
I would think that creating a waterfall of destruction in the first place, would also be prety cruel...especially since you created everyone, including those that you know are going to drown.
Hmmm, Jesus says that He laid down His life for His friends.
In the home computing world/kosmos Mac=Reprobate. ;^)
If God wanted all men to grab the rope and be saved, all men would grab the rope and be saved.
God gets what He wants.
Or else He's not God, He's a politician who gets some people's vote and loses others.
The modern world has become so saturated in "I am the Captain of My Ship" mentality that it thinks it has the power to determine God's will for His creation.
"Even so then at this present time also there is a remnant according to the election of grace."
"And if by grace, then is it no more of works: otherwise grace is no more grace. But if it be of works, then is it no more grace: otherwise work is no more work." -- Romans 11:5-6
"For I say, through the grace given unto me, to every man that is among you, not to think of himself more highly than he ought to think; but to think soberly, according as God hath dealt to every man the measure of faith." -- Romans 12:3
"But by the grace of God I am what I am: and his grace which was bestowed upon me was not in vain; but I laboured more abundantly than they all: yet not I, but the grace of God which was with me." -- 1 Corinthians 15:10
It's been made obvious during these past several years that God illuminates His will for some, and for others He permits them to think they hold the lamp themselves.
And it's all as God wills.
I think a better way to view this scene of bodies floating face down, unable to save themselves, is not that God throws them a rope with the chance they may catch it, but He uses a net and actually pulls them out and saves some.
The Arminian thinks God sees that a person will believe and bestows salvation on that right-believing man.
But with that logic, if God wanted all men saved, He would have made each unbelieving man differently. He would have made them all believers. Yet He made us all, just as we are.
Ultimately, salvation based on God simply "knowing" our choices is specious.
It is all as God wills. Or else He's not God. Men just can't accept the fact that it's His world and not our own.
So I guess you are not longer a 5 pointer huh? One down and 4 to go .
BTW Vines also notes that it is often used as Gentiles as opposed to Jews.
From a historic CALVINIST scholar
Verse 16. For God so loved the world,.... The Persic version reads "men": but not every man in the world is here meant, or all the individuals of human nature; for all are not the objects of God's special love, which is here designed, as appears from the instance and evidence of it, the gift of his Son: nor is Christ God's gift to every one; for to whomsoever he gives his Son, he gives all things freely with him; which is not the case of every man. Nor is human nature here intended, in opposition to, and distinction from, the angelic nature; for though God has showed a regard to fallen men, and not to fallen angels, and has provided a Saviour for the one, and not for the other; and Christ has assumed the nature of men, and not angels; yet not for the sake of all men, but the spiritual seed of Abraham; and besides, it will not be easily proved, that human nature is ever called the world: nor is the whole body of the chosen ones, as consisting of Jews and Gentiles, here designed; for though these are called the world, John 6:33; and are the objects of God's special love, and to them Christ is given, and they are brought to believe in him, and shall never perish, but shall be saved with an everlasting salvation; yet rather the Gentiles particularly, and God's elect among them, are meant; who are often called "the world," and "the whole world," and "the nations of the world," as distinct from the Jews; see Romans 11:12, compared with Matthew 6:32. The Jews had the same distinction we have now, the church and the world; the former they took to themselves, and the latter they gave to all the nations around: hence we often meet with this distinction, Israel, and the nations of the world; on those words, "'let them bring forth their witness,' that they may be justified, Isaiah 43:9 (say {b} the doctors) these are Israel; "or let them hear and say it is truth," these are 'the nations of the world.'" Gill
Oh........but how did He get into us?
Upon that condition (however it is satisfied -- whether by force or by invitation) we are thereby elected unto salvation.
So God sees His Son in us and elects us to Salvation, correct?
If we have the Son in us doesn't that, by definition, make us saved? If so, why do we need to be elected to Salvation seeing as how we already have the Son in us prior to being elected?
Actually, I do believe that God brings about faith. I simply believe that He permits the rebellious to resist and draw back to the detriment of their own eternity. Resistance results from not wanting whatever you understand to be the direction God is taking you. That is why resisting is so terrible.
Almost persuaded is exactly the right perspective. Understanding of what is offered plus resistance that prevents following through.
You are assuming that God's wanting them all saved takes priority over all else that God wanted.
However, are you saying that God did NOT know that you would believe?
So then we have a salvation of works and not grace?
God rewards men for choosing correctly?
What do we make of this .
Jhn 15:16 — Ye have not chosen me, but I have chosen you, ....and this
1Jo 4:19 We love him, because he first loved us.
Jhn 1:13 Which were born, not of blood, nor of the will of the flesh, nor of the will of man, but of God.
You propose a form of Salvation that Man chooses God and then God chooses the man .
You have presented a doctrine where man elects God then God elects man
You have presented a doctrine that man acts and God responds and pays him salvation as wages do . There is no grace in that salvation doctrine (grace is unmerited favor)
Rom 11:5 Even so then at this present time also there is a remnant according to the election of grace.
Rom 11:6 And if by grace, then [is it] no more of works: otherwise grace is no more grace. But if [it be] of works, then is it no more grace: otherwise work is no more work.
You have denied God what you claim for men that is "free will". God is forced to save men because they act correctly .. we need eliminate this scripture for our bibles
Eph 1:5 Having predestinated us unto the adoption of children by Jesus Christ to himself, according to the good pleasure of his will,
(not our deeds)
Eph 1:6 To the praise of the glory of his grace, wherein he hath made us accepted in the beloved.
You responded
Hmmm, Jesus says that He laid down His life for His friends.
Greater love hath no man than this, that a man lay down his life for his friends. - John 15:13 (KJV)
It is so easy to bend scripture and make "his friends" into "His enemies" (the world).
I bet we even have a Greek scholar that can tell us friends really means enemies
Consider this
Jhn 15:19 If ye were of the world, the world would love his own: but because ye are not of the world, but I have chosen you out of the world, therefore the world hateth you.
There we have the chooser and the choose
Not a rope in sight !
Jude24 "1 Jo. 2:2. In black and white."
You may also wish to try this verse as well:
Interesting how Paul specifically separates "all men" from "believers" as far as our Savior. I wonder why the distinction? ;O)
A subtle, but important distinction xzins.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.