Yet another question...Does God love the reprobate?

[InChains620]

I already have somewhat of a clue to the answer of my question but I am going to ask it anyway so I can get some more indepth answers.

Does God love the reprobate? If so in what sense? How is it different from His love for the elect? (present Scripture when answering if at all possible) This is something I need to learn and read more about. I appreciate your replies.

 

[MW]

Does God love the reprobate?

As soon as the word "reprobate" is used, the waters are muddied. God does not love the reprobate as such, for reprobation required perfect hatred. But it would be quite appropriate to say that God loves His own image; hence, insofar as men are still the image of God in a broader sense, it is acceptable to speak in a qualified sense of God loving all men without drawing distinctions between elect and reprobate.

 

[InChains620]

So then it is a differnt love than God's love (or gift of salvation) for the elect. So it is a, for lack of a better word, weaker love than that of the elect?

 

[R. Scott Clark]

I agree with Rev Winzer, that using the term reprobation muddies the water, but to muddy them further, as I recall, Peter van Mastricht was willing to say that God even loves the reprobate.

Is there a distinction between the way God loves the elect and the reprobate? Yes, absolutely.

Scripture says, "Jacob have I loved, Esau have I hated."

The way one speaks about this might be colored by whether one is supra or infra perhaps.

Its certainly true that, in his providence, God showers believers and unbelievers, reprobate and elect with certain common benefits.

Then there is Matt 5:43-48 which sets up an analogy between the way God loves his enemies and the way we are to do:

“You have heard that it was said, ‘You shall love your neighbor and hate your enemy.’ 44 But I say to you, Love your enemies and pray for those who persecute you, 45 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. 46 For if you love those who love you, what reward do you have? Do not even the tax collectors do the same? 47 And if you greet only your brothers, what more are you doing than others? Do not even the Gentiles do the same? 48 You therefore must be pperfect, as your heavenly Father is perfect.

rsc

 

[InChains620]

Yeah, I understand and agree fully with what you are saying. That was the answer I kind of already had formulated in my head. I appreciate any other clarifying anyone can do on the subject.

 

[MW]

So then it is a differnt love than God's love (or gift of salvation) for the elect. So it is a, for lack of a better word, weaker love than that of the elect?

I myself have great difficulties in saying it is a different kind of love. The love God shows to men as men is as effectual as the love He shows the elect. It is simply that God does not purpose to express His love in a saving way to all men. He purposes to make some men objects of wrath. These are His prerogatives and things we are forbidden from searching out. Yet insofar as He loves all men we can say that the goodwill He bears to them has the effect of producing the benefits He intends for them.

Also, there is no difference here amongst supralapsarians and infralapsarians. Samuel Rutherford was about as high a Calvinist as one would meet and he spoke of God loving men in hell in virtue of the fact that He sustains them in being.

 

[CalvinandHodges]

Greetings:

As a supralapsarian I would say that God loves the Elect completely, and the non-Elect partially. I would also disagree that the term "reprobate" muddies the water because the whole world is divided into elect and reprobate.

Cain was clearly a reprobate, yet, God provided protection for him, Gen 4:15. I think the classic text is when Jesus says, "God causes it to rain on the just and the unjust." There is a love from God for the reprobate, but not the love that saves.

Blessings,

-CH

 

[InChains620]

Thanks for your thoughts, I totally agree with the aforementioned statement of Mr. Wieland.

 

[Civbert]

Cain was clearly a reprobate, yet, God provided protection for him, Gen 4:15. I think the classic text is when Jesus says, "God causes it to rain on the just and the unjust." There is a love from God for the reprobate, but not the love that saves.

Blessings,

-CH

Yes. It's the love that sends them to hell.

Elect and reprobate are the main issue about God's love. If God loves the reprobate, why doesn't he save them. I think what gets muddied is what God's love means. Except for rain and sunshine, I don't see a lot of love for the reprobate. And to say God's love is somehow similar or the same from elect to reprobate seems to be mudding the waters. The love God has for the elect is due to the Fathers love for the Son. I don't think there's getting away from the fact that God predestined to send the reprobate to hell, to say He loves them seems to make God irrational.

There's a sense God loves the reprobate the way I might love my tomato bush, and a way God loves the elect like I love my children. If not going to cry over my tomato bush if I have to dig it up and burn it, even though I water it and weed around it for now. That's nothing compared to what I'll do out of love for my child. So I can agree God loves the reprobate in a sense, but that sense is a very weak and potentially misleading sense.

 

[Semper Fidelis]

Alex,

I think it is helpful to understand how this is usually couched when coming from an Arminian.

First, it has somehow become an argument for Arminians to reason thusly: "How can I spread the Gospel if I can't tell a man that Jesus loves you and died for you?"

You're usually dealing with people who assume that this is the Gospel presentation. It is not but it is shocking how many teachers there are that inculcate Christians to believe this way: God loves all mankind equally and gives no preference to any.

Thus, when the Biblical concept of an Elect that God has chosen before the foundation of the world is presented, it completely runs contrary to their pre-suppositions about the character of God. It's almost a waste of time to talk about God's love to an Arminian until you internally defeat their conception and show it to be completely un-Scriptural. It will help if you point out how the Gospel is heralded both in Acts and in the Epistles.

Second, due to a defective view of the love of God that finds its root in a basic denial of the Fall of Man, Arminians tend to view grace as an entitlement. As I tell people all the time - too many Christians are suprised at suffering and death instead of being surprised about Grace. That is, many Arminians will couch the idea of reprobation as God sending innocent people to Hell because God made them reject Him.

I honestly shudder when I hear people talk this way. How a man can view reprobation in such a manner makes me wonder if he has ever fled to the Cross for refuge.

Thus, in addition to challenging what God's love is and what the Gospel presentation really is, one needs to attack an un-Scriptural view and real lack of a federal theology where they don't really understand the just condemnation that all men face in Adam and their utter need for a second Adam that takes away the Curse.

At that point, the term "love" takes on more meaning because it's placed in the context of man's condition and God's grace toward rebel sinners.

 

[MW]

As a supralapsarian I would say that God loves the Elect completely, and the non-Elect partially. I would also disagree that the term "reprobate" muddies the water because the whole world is divided into elect and reprobate.

I think as a supralapsarian you are going to have difficulty with the "same lump" concept of Rom. 9, which is the classic basis for supralapsarianism. That lump is made in the image of God irrespective of election and reprobation. God must have loved men as men, otherwise He would not have made them men.

 

[CalvinandHodges]

I think as a supralapsarian you are going to have difficulty with the "same lump" concept of Rom. 9, which is the classic basis for supralapsarianism. That lump is made in the image of God irrespective of election and reprobation. God must have loved men as men, otherwise He would not have made them men.

Hey:

I do not see the problem as you have stated it above?

God loves the Elect as a Father loves His Children. God loves the Reprobate as a Creator loves that which He creates. The Creator's love for the created does not extend to salvation.

Blessings,

-CH

 

[MW]

God loves the Elect as a Father loves His Children. God loves the Reprobate as a Creator loves that which He creates. The Creator's love for the created does not extend to salvation.

I can't see how it could be stated any better than you have done here.

 

[KMK]

I agree with Rev Winzer...

Is that a first?

Seriously, all of the posts so far have been very enlightening to me.

 

[PresReformed]

God loves the Elect as a Father loves His Children. God loves the Reprobate as a Creator loves that which He creates. The Creator's love for the created does not extend to salvation.

If this statement is true then it would mean that God loves Satan and all the demons also.

 

[MW]

If this statement is true then it would mean that God loves Satan and all the demons also.

We are not told anything with relation to Satan and his angels in this context, so it is best not to speculate. We know the sun rises on wicked men; whether there is an equivalent for the spiritual realm is uncertain. There may be an allusion to some favour being shown Satan in the book of Job, where he is permitted to appear with the sons of God, but the nature of this indulgence isn't expanded.

Interesting that you used the word "demons." In classic literature this usually refers to patron spirits.

 

[VaughanRSmith]

If this statement is true then it would mean that God loves Satan and all the demons also.

Is Satan created in the image of God?

EDIT: Matthew's post is better. My bad.

 

[MW]

Is that a first?

We agree on many things. I especially appreciate Prof. Clark's insistence on confessional Christianity.

 

[PresReformed]

We are not told anything with relation to Satan and his angels in this context, so it is best not to speculate. We know the sun rises on wicked men; whether there is an equivalent for the spiritual realm is uncertain. There may be an allusion to some favour being shown Satan in the book of Job, where he is permitted to appear with the sons of God, but the nature of this indulgence isn't expanded.

Interesting that you used the word "demons." In classic literature this usually refers to patron spirits.

Romans 9 does not mention angels, but to say "God loves the Reprobate as a Creator loves that which He creates" would apply to reprobate angels and therefore Satan also.

 

[PresReformed]

Is Satan created in the image of God?

I believe that angels were created in the the image of God also. So yes, Satan was created in the image of God.

 

[MW]

Romans 9 does not mention angels, but to say "God loves the Reprobate as a Creator loves that which He creates" would apply to reprobate angels and therefore Satan also.

Yes, He made them, providentially sustains them, and overrules their actions for His glory, so I suppose the conclusion would be the same in relation to spirits as to men. However, I don't believe there is enough biblical information to warrant the conclusion, and there could be any number of variables unbeknown to us which might warrant a different conclusion.

 

[KMK]

Yes, He made them, providentially sustains them, and overrules their actions for His glory, so I suppose the conclusion would be the same in relation to spirits as to men. However, I don't believe there is enough biblical information to warrant the conclusion, and there could be any number of variables unbeknown to us which might warrant a different conclusion.

This is good. We can (and often do) reason within ourselves about the secret things of God, but if our conclusions cannot be examined in the light of scripture we must realize that they are only conjecture. Would that apply also to 'supra' and 'infra' arguments?

 

[Civbert]

Romans 9 does not mention angels, but to say "God loves the Reprobate as a Creator loves that which He creates" would apply to reprobate angels and therefore Satan also.

What verse are you quoting?? And what translation?

 

[Theogenes]

John Owen wrote somewhere that God's kindness towards the reprobate is like fattening the cattle for the slaughter. (It's the closest picture I could find )

 

[BobVigneault]

Commentary from Princess Bride:

FEZZIK just stands there, kind of taking in the scenery. Finally the Man In Black pushes himself away, stares up at the Giant.

MAN IN BLACK

Look are you just fiddling around with me or what?

FEZZIK

I just want you to feel you're doing well. I hate for people to die embarrassed.

John Owen wrote somewhere that God's kindness towards the reprobate is like fattening the cattle for the slaughter. (It's the closest picture I could find )

 

[CalvinandHodges]

If this statement is true then it would mean that God loves Satan and all the demons also.

Hi:

Never thought about it that way, but it would make sense. We have this interesting exchange between Jesus and some demons:

And behold, they cried out, saying, What have we to do with thee, Jesus, thou Son of God? art thou come hither to torment us before the time? ... So the devils besought him, saying, If thou cast us out, suffer us to go away into the herd of swine.

And he said unto them, Go. And when they were come out, they went into the herd of swine. Matt. 8:29,31-32a.

It seems that Jesus had compassion on the devils even as he was casting them out.

Grace,

-CH

 

[KMK]

It seems that Jesus had compassion on the devils even as he was casting them out.

I never thought of it that way. It was never clear in my mind why Jesus sent them into the swine. This would be as good an explanation as any I have heard.

 

[Civbert]

I never thought of it that way. It was never clear in my mind why Jesus sent them into the swine. This would be as good an explanation as any I have heard.

Or maybe he did it for the reason the demons said, it was not yet "the time" for tormenting demons.
[bible]mat 8:28-32[/bible]
Was that compassion? Or was it simply giving them their just deserts.

 

[KMK]

Or maybe he did it for the reason the demons said, it was not yet "the time" for tormenting demons.
[bible]mat 8:28-32[/bible]
Was that compassion? Or was it simply giving them their just deserts.

Well, He did grant their request. I don't know if that is compassion or just deserts.

 

[PresReformed]

What verse are you quoting?? And what translation?

I was from CalvinandHodges quote above.