Jesus loves the little children.

[Osage Bluestem]

I disagree. There is a sense in which God loves everyone, in that everyone bears His image and He loves His image. But at the same time, he hates the unregenerate sinner because of his sin nature. I don't think it's contradictory to both love and hate someone.

The way I understood it was that man was made in the image of God, but the fall was a radical fall that effected all of creation. Therefore the image of God that man was made in has basically been wrecked by the fall, when we are finally glorified the image of God is fully restored.

Is this incorrect anyone?

 

[Iconoclast]

The Love of God is found in Christ. God loves sinners in His Son. The age of the sinner is not as important as whether or not they are found IN Christ
Rom 5:[QUOTE 5And hope maketh not ashamed; because the love of God is shed abroad in our hearts by the Holy Ghost which is given unto us. ][/QUOTE]

Rom8;

39Nor height, nor depth, nor any other creature, shall be able to separate us from the love of God, which is in Christ Jesus our Lord.

 

[Skyler]

I disagree. There is a sense in which God loves everyone, in that everyone bears His image and He loves His image. But at the same time, he hates the unregenerate sinner because of his sin nature. I don't think it's contradictory to both love and hate someone.

The way I understood it was that man was made in the image of God, but the fall was a radical fall that effected all of creation. Therefore the image of God that man was made in has basically been wrecked by the fall, when we are finally glorified the image of God is fully restored.

Is this incorrect anyone?

The image of God in everyone is cited as the basis for the wrongness of murder, is it not? Therefore the image of God, while corrupted, is still present. It will be restored ("restored" may be the wrong term here, but it works for now) at glorification.

 

[Osage Bluestem]

I disagree. There is a sense in which God loves everyone, in that everyone bears His image and He loves His image. But at the same time, he hates the unregenerate sinner because of his sin nature. I don't think it's contradictory to both love and hate someone.

The way I understood it was that man was made in the image of God, but the fall was a radical fall that effected all of creation. Therefore the image of God that man was made in has basically been wrecked by the fall, when we are finally glorified the image of God is fully restored.

Is this incorrect anyone?

The image of God in everyone is cited as the basis for the wrongness of murder, is it not? Therefore the image of God, while corrupted, is still present. It will be restored ("restored" may be the wrong term here, but it works for now) at glorification.

Isn't corrupted a light term for it though? From how I understand it it is radically corrupted, basically indistinguishable.

 

[Grillsy]

Thanks for posting that video. Good stuff. It is really needed today.
Although Dr. Morey is a bit smart-alecky with his mocking voices.
Understandable though.

---------- Post added at 03:30 PM ---------- Previous post was at 03:05 PM ----------

 

[Skyler]

I disagree. There is a sense in which God loves everyone, in that everyone bears His image and He loves His image. But at the same time, he hates the unregenerate sinner because of his sin nature. I don't think it's contradictory to both love and hate someone.

The way I understood it was that man was made in the image of God, but the fall was a radical fall that effected all of creation. Therefore the image of God that man was made in has basically been wrecked by the fall, when we are finally glorified the image of God is fully restored.

Is this incorrect anyone?

The image of God in everyone is cited as the basis for the wrongness of murder, is it not? Therefore the image of God, while corrupted, is still present. It will be restored ("restored" may be the wrong term here, but it works for now) at glorification.

Isn't corrupted a light term for it though? From how I understand it it is radically corrupted, basically indistinguishable.

If it were completely destroyed, that would render the argument of Genesis 9:6 moot:

"Whoever sheds the blood of man,by man shall his blood be shed, for God made man in his own image."

The fact that man is created in God's image is the basis for the prohibition of murder in this passage.

Furthermore, the image of God in man includes the ability to reason and know good and evil--neither of which was destroyed at the fall. Damaged, yes, but not destroyed.

 

[Osage Bluestem]

I disagree. There is a sense in which God loves everyone, in that everyone bears His image and He loves His image. But at the same time, he hates the unregenerate sinner because of his sin nature. I don't think it's contradictory to both love and hate someone.

The way I understood it was that man was made in the image of God, but the fall was a radical fall that effected all of creation. Therefore the image of God that man was made in has basically been wrecked by the fall, when we are finally glorified the image of God is fully restored.

Is this incorrect anyone?

The image of God in everyone is cited as the basis for the wrongness of murder, is it not? Therefore the image of God, while corrupted, is still present. It will be restored ("restored" may be the wrong term here, but it works for now) at glorification.

Isn't corrupted a light term for it though? From how I understand it it is radically corrupted, basically indistinguishable.

If it were completely destroyed, that would render the argument of Genesis 9:6 moot:

"Whoever sheds the blood of man,by man shall his blood be shed, for God made man in his own image."

The fact that man is created in God's image is the basis for the prohibition of murder in this passage.

Furthermore, the image of God in man includes the ability to reason and know good and evil--neither of which was destroyed at the fall. Damaged, yes, but not destroyed.

Not utterly destroyed then, but still pretty bad or natural man wouldn't be in bondage to sin.

 

[Skyler]

I disagree. There is a sense in which God loves everyone, in that everyone bears His image and He loves His image. But at the same time, he hates the unregenerate sinner because of his sin nature. I don't think it's contradictory to both love and hate someone.

The way I understood it was that man was made in the image of God, but the fall was a radical fall that effected all of creation. Therefore the image of God that man was made in has basically been wrecked by the fall, when we are finally glorified the image of God is fully restored.

Is this incorrect anyone?

The image of God in everyone is cited as the basis for the wrongness of murder, is it not? Therefore the image of God, while corrupted, is still present. It will be restored ("restored" may be the wrong term here, but it works for now) at glorification.

Isn't corrupted a light term for it though? From how I understand it it is radically corrupted, basically indistinguishable.

If it were completely destroyed, that would render the argument of Genesis 9:6 moot:

"Whoever sheds the blood of man,by man shall his blood be shed, for God made man in his own image."

The fact that man is created in God's image is the basis for the prohibition of murder in this passage.

Furthermore, the image of God in man includes the ability to reason and know good and evil--neither of which was destroyed at the fall. Damaged, yes, but not destroyed.

Not utterly destroyed then, but still pretty bad or natural man wouldn't be in bondage to sin.

Agreed. Do you see my point, though?

 

[toddpedlar]

I disagree. There is a sense in which God loves everyone, in that everyone bears His image and He loves His image. But at the same time, he hates the unregenerate sinner because of his sin nature. I don't think it's contradictory to both love and hate someone.

I'm having a hard time believing that I actually just read this.

I don't think it's contradictory to be both clean and dirty.
I don't think it's contradictory to both speak and not speak.
I don't think it's contradictory to be both black and white.

What postmodern nonsense. If to love and to hate are not diametrically opposed, then why does Christ posit them as such in, e.g., Matthew 5:43-44? Why did God present them as opposites in Romans 9:13?

 

[Osage Bluestem]

I disagree. There is a sense in which God loves everyone, in that everyone bears His image and He loves His image. But at the same time, he hates the unregenerate sinner because of his sin nature. I don't think it's contradictory to both love and hate someone.

The way I understood it was that man was made in the image of God, but the fall was a radical fall that effected all of creation. Therefore the image of God that man was made in has basically been wrecked by the fall, when we are finally glorified the image of God is fully restored.

Is this incorrect anyone?

The image of God in everyone is cited as the basis for the wrongness of murder, is it not? Therefore the image of God, while corrupted, is still present. It will be restored ("restored" may be the wrong term here, but it works for now) at glorification.

Isn't corrupted a light term for it though? From how I understand it it is radically corrupted, basically indistinguishable.

If it were completely destroyed, that would render the argument of Genesis 9:6 moot:

"Whoever sheds the blood of man,by man shall his blood be shed, for God made man in his own image."

The fact that man is created in God's image is the basis for the prohibition of murder in this passage.

Furthermore, the image of God in man includes the ability to reason and know good and evil--neither of which was destroyed at the fall. Damaged, yes, but not destroyed.

Not utterly destroyed then, but still pretty bad or natural man wouldn't be in bondage to sin.

Agreed. Do you see my point, though?

I see how the image of God isn't completely gone. I believe that is has been severely wrecked by the fall and will be restored in full in glory, but I don't understand how the reprobate is both loved and hated. That's why I believe God only loves his elect.

 

[Skyler]

I disagree. There is a sense in which God loves everyone, in that everyone bears His image and He loves His image. But at the same time, he hates the unregenerate sinner because of his sin nature. I don't think it's contradictory to both love and hate someone.

I'm having a hard time believing that I actually just read this.

I don't think it's contradictory to be both clean and dirty.
I don't think it's contradictory to both speak and not speak.
I don't think it's contradictory to be both black and white.

What postmodern nonsense. If to love and to hate are not diametrically opposed, then why does Christ posit them as such in, e.g., Matthew 5:43-44? Why did God present them as opposites in Romans 9:13?

Because in both those cases love and hate are being used in the same sense. I am arguing that it is not contradictory to love someone in one sense and hate them in another sense.

God is said to love his enemies:
"But I say to you, Love your enemies and pray for those who persecute you, so that you may be sons of your Father who is in heaven. For he makes his sun rise on the evil and on the good, and sends rain on the just and on the unjust."

And he is said to hate his enemies:
"The boastful shall not stand before your eyes;
you hate all evildoers."

Either there is a contradiction here, or "love" and "hate" are used in different senses.

P.S. Newspapers are both black and white.

 

[Osage Bluestem]

I disagree. There is a sense in which God loves everyone, in that everyone bears His image and He loves His image. But at the same time, he hates the unregenerate sinner because of his sin nature. I don't think it's contradictory to both love and hate someone.

I'm having a hard time believing that I actually just read this.

I don't think it's contradictory to be both clean and dirty.
I don't think it's contradictory to both speak and not speak.
I don't think it's contradictory to be both black and white.

What postmodern nonsense. If to love and to hate are not diametrically opposed, then why does Christ posit them as such in, e.g., Matthew 5:43-44? Why did God present them as opposites in Romans 9:13?

Because in both those cases love and hate are being used in the same sense. I am arguing that it is not contradictory to love someone in one sense and hate them in another sense.

God is said to love his enemies:
"But I say to you, Love your enemies and pray for those who persecute you, so that you may be sons of your Father who is in heaven. For he makes his sun rise on the evil and on the good, and sends rain on the just and on the unjust."

And he is said to hate his enemies:
"The boastful shall not stand before your eyes;
you hate all evildoers."

Either there is a contradiction here, or "love" and "hate" are used in different senses.

P.S. Newspapers are both black and white.

Personally, I think this falls into the same principle of judging others. We are not allowed to judge because we are not worthy to judge, so it is a sin for us, because any judgment we make will be hypocritical. God is holy so he is allowed to justly judge, so judging is not a sin for him.

Children of God trust in him and his providence and that involves loving your ememies and praying for them, and laying all of your cares before God. God on the other hand is worthy to hate his enemies because only he is holy. So, just because God tells us to love our enemies, doesn't mean that he must play by the same fiddle, because he is holy and set apart from us and all he does is good, where we are naturally wicked and do evil.

 

[toddpedlar]

I disagree. There is a sense in which God loves everyone, in that everyone bears His image and He loves His image. But at the same time, he hates the unregenerate sinner because of his sin nature. I don't think it's contradictory to both love and hate someone.

I'm having a hard time believing that I actually just read this.

I don't think it's contradictory to be both clean and dirty.
I don't think it's contradictory to both speak and not speak.
I don't think it's contradictory to be both black and white.

What postmodern nonsense. If to love and to hate are not diametrically opposed, then why does Christ posit them as such in, e.g., Matthew 5:43-44? Why did God present them as opposites in Romans 9:13?

Because in both those cases love and hate are being used in the same sense. I am arguing that it is not contradictory to love someone in one sense and hate them in another sense.

God is said to love his enemies:
"But I say to you, Love your enemies and pray for those who persecute you, so that you may be sons of your Father who is in heaven. For he makes his sun rise on the evil and on the good, and sends rain on the just and on the unjust."

Perhaps I'm being dense... but where in what you quoted is God said to love His enemies?

And he is said to hate his enemies:
"The boastful shall not stand before your eyes;
you hate all evildoers."

Yes, God is said to hate them.

Either there is a contradiction here, or "love" and "hate" are used in different senses.

Well, you haven't shown either point, that God is said to love His enemies (at least by your quoted Scripture which you maintain DOES show that) so you can't support your claim.

P.S. Newspapers are both black and white.

Actually they're neither black nor white, but that's beside the point.

 

[Skyler]

I disagree. There is a sense in which God loves everyone, in that everyone bears His image and He loves His image. But at the same time, he hates the unregenerate sinner because of his sin nature. I don't think it's contradictory to both love and hate someone.

I'm having a hard time believing that I actually just read this.

I don't think it's contradictory to be both clean and dirty.
I don't think it's contradictory to both speak and not speak.
I don't think it's contradictory to be both black and white.

What postmodern nonsense. If to love and to hate are not diametrically opposed, then why does Christ posit them as such in, e.g., Matthew 5:43-44? Why did God present them as opposites in Romans 9:13?

Because in both those cases love and hate are being used in the same sense. I am arguing that it is not contradictory to love someone in one sense and hate them in another sense.

God is said to love his enemies:
"But I say to you, Love your enemies and pray for those who persecute you, so that you may be sons of your Father who is in heaven. For he makes his sun rise on the evil and on the good, and sends rain on the just and on the unjust."

And he is said to hate his enemies:
"The boastful shall not stand before your eyes;
you hate all evildoers."

Either there is a contradiction here, or "love" and "hate" are used in different senses.

P.S. Newspapers are both black and white.

Personally, I think this falls into the same principle of judging others. We are not allowed to judge because we are not worthy to judge, so it is a sin for us, because any judgment we make will be hypocritical. God is holy so he is allowed to justly judge, so judging is not a sin for him.

Children of God trust in him and his providence and that involves loving your ememies and praying for them, and laying all of your cares before God. God on the other hand is worthy to hate his enemies because only he is holy. So, just because God tells us to love our enemies, doesn't mean that he must play by the same fiddle, because he is holy and set apart from us and all he does is good, where we are naturally wicked and do evil.

Re-read the quote from Matthew 5:

"But I say to you, Love your enemies and pray for those who persecute you, so that you may be sons of your Father who is in heaven. For he makes his sun rise on the evil and on the good, and sends rain on the just and on the unjust."

Love your enemies. Why? So that you may be sons of your Father. What does loving your enemies have to do with being sons of God? He makes his sun to rise on the evil and on the good, and sends rain on the just and on the unjust.

The logical flow of the argument seems clear to me. Our grounds for loving our enemies is based in the nature of God.

---------- Post added at 03:48 PM ---------- Previous post was at 03:46 PM ----------

P.S. Newspapers are both black and white.

Actually they're neither black nor white, but that's beside the point.

The text is black and the paper is white. That's why we call them "black and white". We're not saying the whole newspaper is black and white at the same time, but that one aspect is black and another is white.

 

[Osage Bluestem]

I disagree. There is a sense in which God loves everyone, in that everyone bears His image and He loves His image. But at the same time, he hates the unregenerate sinner because of his sin nature. I don't think it's contradictory to both love and hate someone.

I'm having a hard time believing that I actually just read this.

I don't think it's contradictory to be both clean and dirty.
I don't think it's contradictory to both speak and not speak.
I don't think it's contradictory to be both black and white.

What postmodern nonsense. If to love and to hate are not diametrically opposed, then why does Christ posit them as such in, e.g., Matthew 5:43-44? Why did God present them as opposites in Romans 9:13?

Because in both those cases love and hate are being used in the same sense. I am arguing that it is not contradictory to love someone in one sense and hate them in another sense.

God is said to love his enemies:
"But I say to you, Love your enemies and pray for those who persecute you, so that you may be sons of your Father who is in heaven. For he makes his sun rise on the evil and on the good, and sends rain on the just and on the unjust."

And he is said to hate his enemies:
"The boastful shall not stand before your eyes;
you hate all evildoers."

Either there is a contradiction here, or "love" and "hate" are used in different senses.

P.S. Newspapers are both black and white.

Personally, I think this falls into the same principle of judging others. We are not allowed to judge because we are not worthy to judge, so it is a sin for us, because any judgment we make will be hypocritical. God is holy so he is allowed to justly judge, so judging is not a sin for him.

Children of God trust in him and his providence and that involves loving your ememies and praying for them, and laying all of your cares before God. God on the other hand is worthy to hate his enemies because only he is holy. So, just because God tells us to love our enemies, doesn't mean that he must play by the same fiddle, because he is holy and set apart from us and all he does is good, where we are naturally wicked and do evil.

Re-read the quote from Matthew 5:

"But I say to you, Love your enemies and pray for those who persecute you, so that you may be sons of your Father who is in heaven. For he makes his sun rise on the evil and on the good, and sends rain on the just and on the unjust."

Love your enemies. Why? So that you may be sons of your Father. What does loving your enemies have to do with being sons of God? He makes his sun to rise on the evil and on the good, and sends rain on the just and on the unjust.

The logical flow of the argument seems clear to me. Our grounds for loving our enemies is based in the nature of God.

I can see how one would think that. I think that the passage teaches that God has a good reason to populate the earth with the elect and the reprobate alike, and if not for his grace you would be just like the reporbate, so you are to love them and pray for them, he will be the one to condemn. I don't think this passage teaches that God loves everyone, just that we are to trust in him.

 

[MW]

Re-read the quote from Matthew 5:

"But I say to you, Love your enemies and pray for those who persecute you, so that you may be sons of your Father who is in heaven. For he makes his sun rise on the evil and on the good, and sends rain on the just and on the unjust."

Love your enemies. Why? So that you may be sons of your Father. What does loving your enemies have to do with being sons of God? He makes his sun to rise on the evil and on the good, and sends rain on the just and on the unjust.

The logical flow of the argument seems clear to me. Our grounds for loving our enemies is based in the nature of God.

It is based on the providence of God; there is no statement about the nature of God. This is how God acts in His station; and this is how we are to act in our station. We may not conclude that God loves His enemies, prays for those that persecute Him, or blesses those that curse Him. He is the Sovereign Judge of all the earth; we are not.

 

[Skyler]

I disagree. There is a sense in which God loves everyone, in that everyone bears His image and He loves His image. But at the same time, he hates the unregenerate sinner because of his sin nature. I don't think it's contradictory to both love and hate someone.

I'm having a hard time believing that I actually just read this.

I don't think it's contradictory to be both clean and dirty.
I don't think it's contradictory to both speak and not speak.
I don't think it's contradictory to be both black and white.

What postmodern nonsense. If to love and to hate are not diametrically opposed, then why does Christ posit them as such in, e.g., Matthew 5:43-44? Why did God present them as opposites in Romans 9:13?

Because in both those cases love and hate are being used in the same sense. I am arguing that it is not contradictory to love someone in one sense and hate them in another sense.

God is said to love his enemies:
"But I say to you, Love your enemies and pray for those who persecute you, so that you may be sons of your Father who is in heaven. For he makes his sun rise on the evil and on the good, and sends rain on the just and on the unjust."

And he is said to hate his enemies:
"The boastful shall not stand before your eyes;
you hate all evildoers."

Either there is a contradiction here, or "love" and "hate" are used in different senses.

P.S. Newspapers are both black and white.

Personally, I think this falls into the same principle of judging others. We are not allowed to judge because we are not worthy to judge, so it is a sin for us, because any judgment we make will be hypocritical. God is holy so he is allowed to justly judge, so judging is not a sin for him.

Children of God trust in him and his providence and that involves loving your ememies and praying for them, and laying all of your cares before God. God on the other hand is worthy to hate his enemies because only he is holy. So, just because God tells us to love our enemies, doesn't mean that he must play by the same fiddle, because he is holy and set apart from us and all he does is good, where we are naturally wicked and do evil.

Re-read the quote from Matthew 5:

"But I say to you, Love your enemies and pray for those who persecute you, so that you may be sons of your Father who is in heaven. For he makes his sun rise on the evil and on the good, and sends rain on the just and on the unjust."

Love your enemies. Why? So that you may be sons of your Father. What does loving your enemies have to do with being sons of God? He makes his sun to rise on the evil and on the good, and sends rain on the just and on the unjust.

The logical flow of the argument seems clear to me. Our grounds for loving our enemies is based in the nature of God.

I can see how one would think that. I think that the passage teaches that God has a good reason to populate the earth with the elect and the reprobate alike, and if not for his grace you would be just like the reporbate, so you are to love them and pray for them, he will be the one to condemn. I don't think this passage teaches that God loves everyone, just that we are to trust in him.

So do you disagree with my interpretation of the passage? If so, can you explain why it's wrong please?

 

[Osage Bluestem]

I disagree. There is a sense in which God loves everyone, in that everyone bears His image and He loves His image. But at the same time, he hates the unregenerate sinner because of his sin nature. I don't think it's contradictory to both love and hate someone.

I'm having a hard time believing that I actually just read this.

I don't think it's contradictory to be both clean and dirty.
I don't think it's contradictory to both speak and not speak.
I don't think it's contradictory to be both black and white.

What postmodern nonsense. If to love and to hate are not diametrically opposed, then why does Christ posit them as such in, e.g., Matthew 5:43-44? Why did God present them as opposites in Romans 9:13?

Because in both those cases love and hate are being used in the same sense. I am arguing that it is not contradictory to love someone in one sense and hate them in another sense.

God is said to love his enemies:
"But I say to you, Love your enemies and pray for those who persecute you, so that you may be sons of your Father who is in heaven. For he makes his sun rise on the evil and on the good, and sends rain on the just and on the unjust."

And he is said to hate his enemies:
"The boastful shall not stand before your eyes;
you hate all evildoers."

Either there is a contradiction here, or "love" and "hate" are used in different senses.

P.S. Newspapers are both black and white.

Personally, I think this falls into the same principle of judging others. We are not allowed to judge because we are not worthy to judge, so it is a sin for us, because any judgment we make will be hypocritical. God is holy so he is allowed to justly judge, so judging is not a sin for him.

Children of God trust in him and his providence and that involves loving your ememies and praying for them, and laying all of your cares before God. God on the other hand is worthy to hate his enemies because only he is holy. So, just because God tells us to love our enemies, doesn't mean that he must play by the same fiddle, because he is holy and set apart from us and all he does is good, where we are naturally wicked and do evil.

Re-read the quote from Matthew 5:

"But I say to you, Love your enemies and pray for those who persecute you, so that you may be sons of your Father who is in heaven. For he makes his sun rise on the evil and on the good, and sends rain on the just and on the unjust."

Love your enemies. Why? So that you may be sons of your Father. What does loving your enemies have to do with being sons of God? He makes his sun to rise on the evil and on the good, and sends rain on the just and on the unjust.

The logical flow of the argument seems clear to me. Our grounds for loving our enemies is based in the nature of God.

I can see how one would think that. I think that the passage teaches that God has a good reason to populate the earth with the elect and the reprobate alike, and if not for his grace you would be just like the reporbate, so you are to love them and pray for them, he will be the one to condemn. I don't think this passage teaches that God loves everyone, just that we are to trust in him.

So do you disagree with my interpretation of the passage? If so, can you explain why it's wrong please?

Well, I think that God only loves his elect. Since he is set apart (holy) and sovereign, he is the just judge of all creation, the scriptures say that God is angry with the wicked every day and that he changes not, so I believe that the passage is calling for us to love our enemies and trust in God's providence because he is good, not to love our enemies because he loves his. So I base it off off that, I guess.

 

[Skyler]

Okay, you're still not answering my question though. Is my interpretation incorrect, and if so, why? All you've done is provide an alternative interpretation; you haven't explained why mine cannot be the case.

 

[MW]

Okay, you're still not answering my question though. Is my interpretation incorrect, and if so, why? All you've done is provide an alternative interpretation; you haven't explained why mine cannot be the case.

Does God pray for those that persecute Him? If you sense there is something unreasonable about admitting this part of your logical conclusion, then the same unreasonableness applies to the conclusion that God loves His enemies.

 

[Skyler]

Okay, you're still not answering my question though. Is my interpretation incorrect, and if so, why? All you've done is provide an alternative interpretation; you haven't explained why mine cannot be the case.

Does God pray for those that persecute Him? If you sense there is something unreasonable about admitting this part of your logical conclusion, then the same unreasonableness applies to the conclusion that God loves His enemies.

Luke 23:34
"And Jesus said, 'Father, forgive them, for they know not what they do.'"

Jesus is God. Jesus prayed for those who persecuted him. Therefore, God prayed for those who persecuted Him.

 

[MW]

Jesus is God. Jesus prayed for those who persecuted him. Therefore, God prayed for those who persecuted Him.

If this reasoning were valid it would be equally true that Jesus is God; Jesus hungered; therefore, God hungered. I hope you can see that your logic does not account for the fact that the Second Person of the incorruptible Godhead assumed human nature, and that as Mediator He did what was proper to each nature with its own qualities.

 

[Skyler]

Jesus is God. Jesus prayed for those who persecuted him. Therefore, God prayed for those who persecuted Him.

If this reasoning were valid it would be equally true that Jesus is God; Jesus hungered; therefore, God hungered. I hope you can see that your logic does not account for the fact that the Second Person of the incorruptible Godhead assumed human nature, and that as Mediator He did what was proper to each nature with its own qualities.

Then if it was proper for Jesus, in his human nature, to pray for his persecutors, it was also proper for Jesus, in his human nature, to love his enemies, correct?

 

[timmopussycat]

I disagree. There is a sense in which God loves everyone, in that everyone bears His image and He loves His image. But at the same time, he hates the unregenerate sinner because of his sin nature. I don't think it's contradictory to both love and hate someone.

I'm having a hard time believing that I actually just read this.

I don't think it's contradictory to be both clean and dirty.
I don't think it's contradictory to both speak and not speak.
I don't think it's contradictory to be both black and white.

What postmodern nonsense. If to love and to hate are not diametrically opposed, then why does Christ posit them as such in, e.g., Matthew 5:43-44? Why did God present them as opposites in Romans 9:13?

One may note that apparent contradictions are not always total contradictions without falling into the slough of Postmodernism. It is possible that love and hate are not always diametrically opposed but, for that to occur, the love and the hate must never be contradictory in the same sense. If it is possible for God to love someone in one sense and hate them in another, the parallel might be a person who is morally clean yet physically dirty.

Rom. 9:13 by extension appears at first glance to mean that God hates all the reprobate in all possible ways, but that conclusion is challenged by 1 Tim. 2:4's statement that God "desires all men to be saved." If God desires the reprobate to be saved from hell in some sense, he is, in some sense "desiring" something that is to their eternal good. If he is doing that, how can God be said to "hate" the reprobate in all senses of that word?

 

[toddpedlar]

Re-read the quote from Matthew 5:

"But I say to you, Love your enemies and pray for those who persecute you, so that you may be sons of your Father who is in heaven. For he makes his sun rise on the evil and on the good, and sends rain on the just and on the unjust."

Love your enemies. Why? So that you may be sons of your Father. What does loving your enemies have to do with being sons of God? He makes his sun to rise on the evil and on the good, and sends rain on the just and on the unjust.

The logical flow of the argument seems clear to me. Our grounds for loving our enemies is based in the nature of God.

The problem is that your argument is not made on the basis of logic, but upon a presupposition of yours; in logical terms, what I believe you've done is an instance of begging the question. You have inserted into the argument your belief that God loves all men (in some sense) indiscriminately; though that appears nowhere in the argument, you have concluded that this belief somehow logically flows from your quotation of Matthew 5.

On the contrary, here is what the text actually says:

Jesus says we are to love both enemies and friends. He says that this action on our part is somehow connected to our being God's sons. You may wish to look at John's epistles to see how this connection comes about. It does not have to do with God's nature, but with a proper, grateful response to God's love for us, his sons. The text says absolutely zero about God's nature.

Jesus secondly illustrates our actions of loving of both friend and enemy by stating that God makes rain fall on the just and the unjust. He illustrates this by showing that he is willing to provide rain to both. Where is God's love discussed here? Nowhere. Is rain falling on the just and the unjust "love"? Not by any stretch of the word.

God does NOT anywhere say that his making the rain fall on the just and the unjust alike is because of an indscriminate love for all. You are importing that idea into the text. The text itself does not say, nor does it imply this, which is why I argued that you could not claim that you had proven your case based on your citation of this verse. It does not serve your purposes.

 

[toddpedlar]

I disagree. There is a sense in which God loves everyone, in that everyone bears His image and He loves His image. But at the same time, he hates the unregenerate sinner because of his sin nature. I don't think it's contradictory to both love and hate someone.

I'm having a hard time believing that I actually just read this.

I don't think it's contradictory to be both clean and dirty.
I don't think it's contradictory to both speak and not speak.
I don't think it's contradictory to be both black and white.

What postmodern nonsense. If to love and to hate are not diametrically opposed, then why does Christ posit them as such in, e.g., Matthew 5:43-44? Why did God present them as opposites in Romans 9:13?

One may note that apparent contradictions are not always total contradictions without falling into the slough of Postmodernism. It is possible that love and hate are not always diametrically opposed but, for that to occur, the love and the hate must never be contradictory in the same sense. If it is possible for God to love someone in one sense and hate them in another, the parallel might be a person who is morally clean yet physically dirty.

Rom. 9:13 by extension appears at first glance to mean that God hates all the reprobate in all possible ways, but that conclusion is challenged by 1 Tim. 2:4's statement that God "desires all men to be saved." If God desires the reprobate to be saved from hell in some sense, he is, in some sense "desiring" something that is to their eternal good. If he is doing that, how can God be said to "hate" the reprobate in all senses of that word?

This begs the question. You know as well as I do that "all men" is never to be read out of context, and rarely means "each and every individual man".

 

[toddpedlar]

Jesus is God. Jesus prayed for those who persecuted him. Therefore, God prayed for those who persecuted Him.

If this reasoning were valid it would be equally true that Jesus is God; Jesus hungered; therefore, God hungered. I hope you can see that your logic does not account for the fact that the Second Person of the incorruptible Godhead assumed human nature, and that as Mediator He did what was proper to each nature with its own qualities.

Then if it was proper for Jesus, in his human nature, to pray for his persecutors, it was also proper for Jesus, in his human nature, to love his enemies, correct?

Yes, as it is for us, as human beings.

 

[MW]

Then if it was proper for Jesus, in his human nature, to pray for his persecutors, it was also proper for Jesus, in his human nature, to love his enemies, correct?

Yes, especially considering He was debtor to the whole law.

 

[jayce475]

This thread brings to mind the mainline catchphrase of "God loves the sinner but hates the sin". I hear that mentioned whenever there is a discussion on homosexuality. It's not really biblical, is it? God loving His children and hating the reprobate seems to be quite different from God loving all sinners.

 

[Skyler]

Re-read the quote from Matthew 5:

"But I say to you, Love your enemies and pray for those who persecute you, so that you may be sons of your Father who is in heaven. For he makes his sun rise on the evil and on the good, and sends rain on the just and on the unjust."

Love your enemies. Why? So that you may be sons of your Father. What does loving your enemies have to do with being sons of God? He makes his sun to rise on the evil and on the good, and sends rain on the just and on the unjust.

The logical flow of the argument seems clear to me. Our grounds for loving our enemies is based in the nature of God.

The problem is that your argument is not made on the basis of logic, but upon a presupposition of yours; in logical terms, what I believe you've done is an instance of begging the question. You have inserted into the argument your belief that God loves all men (in some sense) indiscriminately; though that appears nowhere in the argument, you have concluded that this belief somehow logically flows from your quotation of Matthew 5.

On the contrary, here is what the text actually says:

Jesus says we are to love both enemies and friends. He says that this action on our part is somehow connected to our being God's sons. You may wish to look at John's epistles to see how this connection comes about. It does not have to do with God's nature, but with a proper, grateful response to God's love for us, his sons. The text says absolutely zero about God's nature.

Jesus secondly illustrates our actions of loving of both friend and enemy by stating that God makes rain fall on the just and the unjust. He illustrates this by showing that he is willing to provide rain to both. Where is God's love discussed here? Nowhere. Is rain falling on the just and the unjust "love"? Not by any stretch of the word.

God does NOT anywhere say that his making the rain fall on the just and the unjust alike is because of an indscriminate love for all. You are importing that idea into the text. The text itself does not say, nor does it imply this, which is why I argued that you could not claim that you had proven your case based on your citation of this verse. It does not serve your purposes.

I'm defining his general love by the idea of "God sending his rain on the just and the unjust", not "importing" it. This "general love" is illustrated by passages such as Matthew 5 as well as Ezekiel 33:11, Psalm 145:8-9, etc.:

Ezekiel 33:11:
Say to them, As I live, declares the Lord GOD, I have no pleasure in the death of the wicked, but that the wicked turn from his way and live; turn back, turn back from your evil ways, for why will you die, O house of Israel?

Psalm 145:8-9:
The LORD is gracious and merciful,
slow to anger and abounding in steadfast love.
The LORD is good to all,
and his mercy is over all that he has made.

Would you also disagree with common grace?

As a side note, I think we've answered the original question--if Jesus in his humanity loves everyone, then there's nothing wrong with singing "Jesus loves the little children".