Love vs Hate

[rhutchin]

Yes. If God can hate, and God is love, then it follows that love can hate. We might as well claim that black can be white, and up can be down, and good can be evil, and Arminians can be Calvinists while we're at it...

Semitic thought and language did not have comparatives. Comparisons were thus expressed using extreme language. To "hate" means "to love less" - not literally to "hate" in the sense that we understand it. Unless you think that Jesus literally told us that unless we hate our own relatives we are not worthy of him.

Check out this article (http://www.tektonics.org/gk/jesussayshate.html) [rhutchin: a superficial treatment of the issue]for more details...

Anger is not the same thing as hatred. Any truly loving parent will tell you that...

I do not consider it unloving of God to "hate" those who exalt themselves above Him. God loves them, too. But this love is often perceived as hate by those to whom it is directed...

In another thread, Jezz made the above comments among others. It is enough to get a flavor for this issue.

The idea that "hate" might mean "love less" is nonsense. If there are those who do not like the term, "hate," then your only recourse is to use the term, "not love."

When Malachi expresses the idea that God hates divorce, he does not mean to convey the idea that God loves divorce less than marriage. The idea is that God hates divorce; He has no love for divorce.

When we are told that Jacob hated Leah, we can be certain that Jacob loved Rachel and that he did not love Leah. That distinction did not mean that Jacob went out of his way to torment Leah but it does mean that he went out of his way to please Rachel. We might think that Jacob was indifferent to Leah.

When we are told that one cannot love both God and mammon, it does not mean that we can have our cake and eat it too. We do not read this to say that we can love God and love mamon also, but less than we love God. It means that to love God we cannot love mammon no matter how "less" we want to make it.

When we are told that we must love Christ and hate others, it means that we cannot love both at the same time. It is either one or the other. Can a person love his wife without detracting from his love for Christ? The obvious answer is, NO. To think otherwise is to misunderstand what Christ means when He says that we must love Him.

The expression of our love for Christ is that we love our wife, our neighbor, and our enemy. We must first love Christ exclusively and totally before we can express love for anyone else. The love that we express toward others is not a reaction to something in others but a reaction to Christ. Apart from Christ, no one can love.

Many will be jumping into 1 John at this point, pointing to this or that which is found there. The bottom line from 1 John is, "..we know that we love the children of God: whenever we love God and obey his commandments." That is the context for that which John has written in the epistle. This is no different than Christ saying that we must love Him and hate others.

[themuzicman]

The context of "love" and "hate" with relation to Jacob and Easu is covenantal language. Jacob was loved because he was the child through which the covenant would proceed, in spite of the fact that Easu was firstborn, which is why he was "hated."

Citing my greek prof, the idea of "love" in the ANE was very much covenantal. It referred to living in a committed manner towards another.

So, to love God meant that you were living a life that was committed to Him. If you hated God, that meant you were in violation of the covenant with Him. This is the context of love in John, as well.

Michael

[GoBahnsen]

In another thread, Jezz made the above comments among others. It is enough to get a flavor for this issue.

The idea that "hate" might mean "love less" is nonsense. If there are those who do not like the term, "hate," then your only recourse is to use the term, "not love."

When Malachi expresses the idea that God hates divorce, he does not mean to convey the idea that God loves divorce less than marriage. The idea is that God hates divorce; He has no love for divorce.

When we are told that Jacob hated Leah, we can be certain that Jacob loved Rachel and that he did not love Leah. That distinction did not mean that Jacob went out of his way to torment Leah but it does mean that he went out of his way to please Rachel. We might think that Jacob was indifferent to Leah.

When we are told that one cannot love both God and mammon, it does not mean that we can have our cake and eat it too. We do not read this to say that we can love God and love mamon also, but less than we love God. It means that to love God we cannot love mammon no matter how "less" we want to make it.

When we are told that we must love Christ and hate others, it means that we cannot love both at the same time. It is either one or the other. Can a person love his wife without detracting from his love for Christ? The obvious answer is, NO. To think otherwise is to misunderstand what Christ means when He says that we must love Him.

The expression of our love for Christ is that we love our wife, our neighbor, and our enemy. We must first love Christ exclusively and totally before we can express love for anyone else. The love that we express toward others is not a reaction to something in others but a reaction to Christ. Apart from Christ, no one can love.

Many will be jumping into 1 John at this point, pointing to this or that which is found there. The bottom line from 1 John is, "..we know that we love the children of God: whenever we love God and obey his commandments." That is the context for that which John has written in the epistle. This is no different than Christ saying that we must love Him and hate others.Thanks Rhut. I think I learned something here. I hadn't quite seen this before in the way you expressed it.

[lee_merrill]

Hi everyone,

I think it's good also to note that there are different types of love, and thus also different types of hate. So you can love a person in one sense (agape), and yet hate them in another (the opposite of affection, say).

Blessings,
Lee

[seer]

Hi everyone,

I think it's good also to note that there are different types of love, and thus also different types of hate. So you can love a person in one sense (agape), and yet hate them in another (the opposite of affection, say).

Blessings,
Lee

I think you are quite right Lee. You can hate what a man allowed himself to become. But still love him in the sense that you truly want to see his restoration.

[seer]

The expression of our love for Christ is that we love our wife, our neighbor, and our enemy. We must first love Christ exclusively and totally before we can express love for anyone else. The love that we express toward others is not a reaction to something in others but a reaction to Christ. Apart from Christ, no one can love.

This simply does not follow.

Matthew 5:46:

"For if you love those who love you, what reward have you? Do not even the tax collectors do the same?"

Even sinners can love those who love them. And this is "agape" love that Christ is speaking of here. But to love fully as God would have us love - that is another story...

[Jezz]

In another thread, Jezz made the above comments among others. It is enough to get a flavor for this issue.
No, the above is not enough to get a flavour for this issue, because you cut off the question that I was responding to.

I originally claimed that God loves everyone.

GB claimed in response that "God hates sinners".

It was in this context that I said "hate" means 'love less'".

God does not hate sinners in an absolute sense. He hates them in the sense that he blesses them less than righteous people. As Muz said, it's a covenantal thing.

The idea that "hate" might mean "love less" is nonsense. If there are those who do not like the term, "hate," then your only recourse is to use the term, "not love."
It is nonsense?

"If anyone comes to me and does not hate his father and mother, his wife and children, his brothers and sisters–yes, even his own life–he cannot be my disciple.

What's this? Jesus is saying that we need to actually hate our parents if we want to be His disciples? Our children too? Our spouse? Our own life? And yet elsewhere, we are commanded to love our family members and respect our parents. God wouldn't contradict Himself now, would He?

Of course He doesn't. And the only way to resolve this apparent contradiction is by admitting that when Christ tells us to hate our father and mother, what He really means is that we have to love Him more than we love our father and mother.

As I explained, this is quite within the bounds of semitic usage. Semitic thought expresses comparisons in terms of extremes - they don't have explicit comparative constructions like we do (ie, more than/less than). Thus, instead of saying "love X more than you love Y", a semite expresses this as "love X and hate Y".

I even cited an article explaining this. JP Holding doesn't pull this claim out of mid air. He cites Abraham Ribhany - author of The Syrian Christ and a man who was himself a semite and resident of the Near East. Are you going to claim that Ribhany didn't know what he was talking about? (Incidentally, I cannot help but be amused that your rejection of JPH's article as "superficial" was so... well... superficial, for lack of a better word... :lol:)

In point of fact, love/hate, hot/cold, good/evil, light/darkness - these are always relative expressions. Water at 60C is more hot than water at 4C, but less hot than water at 90C. And in this context, note that "cold" is merely a "lack of heat" - something that is less hot. Likewise, "love" is the absolute, and "hate" is a lack of love.

When Malachi expresses the idea that God hates divorce, he does not mean to convey the idea that God loves divorce less than marriage. The idea is that God hates divorce; He has no love for divorce.
If he has no love for divorce, then he certainly has less love for divorce than for marriage, doesn't he?

And if God hates divorce in an absolute sense, then why did He not prohibit it absolutely? Why did he permit it under some circumstances (eg, for marital unfaithfulness)? Clearly, because He hates that a person should have to stay in an abusive relationship more than He hates divorce. In other words, God does not hate divorce absolutely. While He certainly hates it a lot compared with the ideal of marriage, there are some things that He hates still more (eg, an unfaithful spouse).

When we are told that Jacob hated Leah, we can be certain that Jacob loved Rachel and that he did not love Leah. That distinction did not mean that Jacob went out of his way to torment Leah but it does mean that he went out of his way to please Rachel. We might think that Jacob was indifferent to Leah.
What? Jacob was "indifferent" to Leah? You mean that when it said he hated Leah, it didn't really mean that He hated her? You've just refuted your own argument! Of course, in my understanding (where hate is a relative term), I have no problem thinking that "hate" could mean "indifference".

Jacob didn't hate Leah. If he hated her, he would not have fed her, clothed her, protected her from danger - all actions of love. Jacob loved Leah enough not to let her die or even to go without. But he loved Rachel more.

When we are told that one cannot love both God and mammon, it does not mean that we can have our cake and eat it too. We do not read this to say that we can love God and love mamon also, but less than we love God. It means that to love God we cannot love mammon no matter how "less" we want to make it.
False. It means that we should only love money insofar as it serves our love for God.

When we are told that we must love Christ and hate others, it means that we cannot love both at the same time. It is either one or the other. Can a person love his wife without detracting from his love for Christ? The obvious answer is, NO. To think otherwise is to misunderstand what Christ means when He says that we must love Him.
This is completely false, and undermines what you say in your next point:

The expression of our love for Christ is that we love our wife, our neighbor, and our enemy. We must first love Christ exclusively and totally before we can express love for anyone else. The love that we express toward others is not a reaction to something in others but a reaction to Christ. Apart from Christ, no one can love.
I certainly agree with this - anyone who claims to love Christ but does not love others does not really love Christ. But this stands in direct contradiction to your previous paragraph - where you claimed that we cannot love both at the same time. Now you're telling me that we must love both at the same time.

Make up your mind: does God want us to hate others or not? Please tell me whether I should hate other people or love them, so that I can go about doing the will of God properly...

Many will be jumping into 1 John at this point, pointing to this or that which is found there. The bottom line from 1 John is, "..we know that we love the children of God: whenever we love God and obey his commandments." That is the context for that which John has written in the epistle. This is no different than Christ saying that we must love Him and hate others.
This is the same error you have produced above. See above for a rebuttal.

[rhutchin]

rhutchin
In another thread, Jezz made the above comments among others. It is enough to get a flavor for this issue.

Jezz
No, the above is not enough to get a flavour for this issue, because you cut off the question that I was responding to.

I originally claimed that God loves everyone.

GB claimed in response that "God hates sinners".

It was in this context that I said "hate" means 'love less'".

God does not hate sinners in an absolute sense. He hates them in the sense that he blesses them less than righteous people. As Muz said, it's a covenantal thing.

I purposely used your examples, so the expansion of the argument was on your part.

However, themuzicman is correct. Love is covenantal. So what does that mean? My explanation is that God’s love depends on Himself. He loves others not because of who they are but because of who He is. His love is expressed in His covenants (promises) to those whom He loves. Similarly, our love is expressed in our covenants with God (our promises to Him). 1 John deals with those promises.

Whether we can say that God blesses sinners less than righteous is debatable. Certainly, God blesses the righteous and gives them rain for crops, etc. Those blessings fall upon the sinners also but are given because of God’s covenant with the righteous. God has no covenant with sinners and therefore has not obligated Himself to bless sinners. I cannot think of an example of God blessing sinners except as a consequence of His blessing the righteous. When GB says that God hates sinners, the conclusion is not that God blesses them less than the righteous but that God does not bless them at all. The blessings sinners receive are derived from the blessings God gives to the righteous.


rhutchin
The idea that "hate" might mean "love less" is nonsense. If there are those who do not like the term, "hate," then your only recourse is to use the term, "not love."

Jezz
It is nonsense?

Luke 14:26
"If anyone comes to me and does not hate his father and mother, his wife and children, his brothers and sisters–yes, even his own life–he cannot be my disciple.

What's this? Jesus is saying that we need to actually hate our parents if we want to be His disciples? Our children too? Our spouse? Our own life? And yet elsewhere, we are commanded to love our family members and respect our parents. God wouldn't contradict Himself now, would He?

Of course He doesn't. And the only way to resolve this apparent contradiction is by admitting that when Christ tells us to hate our father and mother, what He really means is that we have to love Him more than we love our father and mother.

As I explained, this is quite within the bounds of semitic usage. Semitic thought expresses comparisons in terms of extremes - they don't have explicit comparative constructions like we do (ie, more than/less than). Thus, instead of saying "love X more than you love Y", a semite expresses this as "love X and hate Y".

I even cited an article explaining this. JP Holding doesn't pull this claim out of mid air. He cites Abraham Ribhany - author of The Syrian Christ and a man who was himself a semite and resident of the Near East. Are you going to claim that Ribhany didn't know what he was talking about? (Incidentally, I cannot help but be amused that your rejection of JPH's article as "superficial" was so... well... superficial, for lack of a better word... )

In point of fact, love/hate, hot/cold, good/evil, light/darkness - these are always relative expressions. Water at 60C is more hot than water at 4C, but less hot than water at 90C. And in this context, note that "cold" is merely a "lack of heat" - something that is less hot. Likewise, "love" is the absolute, and "hate" is a lack of love.

I do not know Abraham Ribhany. However, he sounds Jewish and the Jews are famous for not understanding their own Scriptures (OT). If the Jewish commentators do not understand their own Scriptures and consequently, reject Christ, then how can we say that they understand those Scriptures on other points.

At the end you say, “Likewise, "love" is the absolute, and "hate" is a lack of love.” I agree and that was my point. Hate is not just less love; it is the lack of love.

The absolute is then to be applied to the verse you cited. We clearly understand the relationship we are to have with Christ. We are to love Him. That relationship requires that we hate others. Christ accepts nothing less than our total and complete love.


rhutchin
When Malachi expresses the idea that God hates divorce, he does not mean to convey the idea that God loves divorce less than marriage. The idea is that God hates divorce; He has no love for divorce.

Jezz
If he has no love for divorce, then he certainly has less love for divorce than for marriage, doesn't he?

And if God hates divorce in an absolute sense, then why did He not prohibit it absolutely? Why did he permit it under some circumstances (eg, for marital unfaithfulness)? Clearly, because He hates that a person should have to stay in an abusive relationship more than He hates divorce. In other words, God does not hate divorce absolutely. While He certainly hates it a lot compared with the ideal of marriage, there are some things that He hates still more (eg, an unfaithful spouse).

If you want to define “less love” as “no love,” I can agree to do that. My suspicion is that you would probably want to fudge on this.

Christ tells us that God allowed divorce because of the hardness of the people’s hearts. Basically, God allows sin because of the hardness of people’s hearts. GB is correct when he says that God hates sinners, but we understand that God allows sinners to sin. I would not conclude that allowing people to sin is an expression of love. I would categorize it as an expression of hate given the penalty for that sin.


rhutchin
When we are told that Jacob hated Leah, we can be certain that Jacob loved Rachel and that he did not love Leah. That distinction did not mean that Jacob went out of his way to torment Leah but it does mean that he went out of his way to please Rachel. We might think that Jacob was indifferent to Leah.

Jezz
What? Jacob was "indifferent" to Leah? You mean that when it said he hated Leah, it didn't really mean that He hated her? You've just refuted your own argument! Of course, in my understanding (where hate is a relative term), I have no problem thinking that "hate" could mean "indifference".

Jacob didn't hate Leah. If he hated her, he would not have fed her, clothed her, protected her from danger - all actions of love. Jacob loved Leah enough not to let her die or even to go without. But he loved Rachel more.

The definition of hate is the absence of love. Love is an proactive concept. Love initiates actions toward the person one loves. The need then is to define “hate.” I used the term, “indifference,” because it is those times when I appear indifferent toward my wife that she is prone to question whether I love her. Is indifference the same as hate? Maybe not, but it has the appearance of being hate.

I am not sure that hate requires that one not protect or clothe the one who is hated. I suspect that Leah earned her keep. One may hate an employee but still pay him for the work that he does.

rhutchin
When we are told that one cannot love both God and mammon, it does not mean that we can have our cake and eat it too. We do not read this to say that we can love God and love mammon also, but less than we love God. It means that to love God we cannot love mammon no matter how "less" we want to make it.

Jezz
False. It means that we should only love money insofar as it serves our love for God.

Since money contributes nothing to our love for God, there is no basis for loving money. Consequently, one can only love money at the expense of loving God. One cannot love both God and mammon at the same time without dividing one’s love between the two and thereby preferring one to the other.


rhutchin
When we are told that we must love Christ and hate others, it means that we cannot love both at the same time. It is either one or the other. Can a person love his wife without detracting from his love for Christ? The obvious answer is, NO. To think otherwise is to misunderstand what Christ means when He says that we must love Him.

Jezz
This is completely false, and undermines what you say in your next point:

If you think this is false, then my point is that you misunderstand what Christ means when He says that we must love Him.


rhutchin
The expression of our love for Christ is that we love our wife, our neighbor, and our enemy. We must first love Christ exclusively and totally before we can express love for anyone else. The love that we express toward others is not a reaction to something in others but a reaction to Christ. Apart from Christ, no one can love.

Jezz
I certainly agree with this - anyone who claims to love Christ but does not love others does not really love Christ. But this stands in direct contradiction to your previous paragraph - where you claimed that we cannot love both at the same time. Now you're telling me that we must love both at the same time.

Make up your mind: does God want us to hate others or not? Please tell me whether I should hate other people or love them, so that I can go about doing the will of God properly...

Granted, this is a difficult concept to explain. However, as 1 John explains we love others when we love God and obey his commandments. If we agree on this definition, then we should also see that the world will describe this as hate. If you express love toward others by keeping God’s commandments, then murderers, thieves, homosexuals, adulterers, liars, and all who seek to do evil will say that you hate them. To show preference to God by keeping His commandments is to hate those who insist that we disobey those commandments.


rhutchin
Many will be jumping into 1 John at this point, pointing to this or that which is found there. The bottom line from 1 John is, "..we know that we love the children of God: whenever we love God and obey his commandments." That is the context for that which John has written in the epistle. This is no different than Christ saying that we must love Him and hate others.

Jezz
This is the same error you have produced above. See above for a rebuttal.

Again, the need is to define “Love for others.” Will you agree to define “love” as “obeying God’s commandments"? If yes, then there is no error in my argument.

[GoBahnsen]

I purposely used your examples, so the expansion of the argument was on your part.

However, themuzicman is correct. Love is covenantal. So what does that mean? My explanation is that God’s love depends on Himself. He loves others not because of who they are but because of who He is. His love is expressed in His covenants (promises) to those whom He loves. Similarly, our love is expressed in our covenants with God (our promises to Him). 1 John deals with those promises.

Whether we can say that God blesses sinners less than righteous is debatable. Certainly, God blesses the righteous and gives them rain for crops, etc. Those blessings fall upon the sinners also but are given because of God’s covenant with the righteous. God has no covenant with sinners and therefore has not obligated Himself to bless sinners. I cannot think of an example of God blessing sinners except as a consequence of His blessing the righteous. When GB says that God hates sinners, the conclusion is not that God blesses them less than the righteous but that God does not bless them at all. The blessings sinners receive are derived from the blessings God gives to the righteous.




I do not know Abraham Ribhany. However, he sounds Jewish and the Jews are famous for not understanding their own Scriptures (OT). If the Jewish commentators do not understand their own Scriptures and consequently, reject Christ, then how can we say that they understand those Scriptures on other points.

At the end you say, “Likewise, "love" is the absolute, and "hate" is a lack of love.” I agree and that was my point. Hate is not just less love; it is the lack of love.

The absolute is then to be applied to the verse you cited. We clearly understand the relationship we are to have with Christ. We are to love Him. That relationship requires that we hate others. Christ accepts nothing less than our total and complete love.




If you want to define “less love” as “no love,” I can agree to do that. My suspicion is that you would probably want to fudge on this.

Christ tells us that God allowed divorce because of the hardness of the people’s hearts. Basically, God allows sin because of the hardness of people’s hearts. GB is correct when he says that God hates sinners, but we understand that God allows sinners to sin. I would not conclude that allowing people to sin is an expression of love. I would categorize it as an expression of hate given the penalty for that sin.




The definition of hate is the absence of love. Love is an proactive concept. Love initiates actions toward the person one loves. The need then is to define “hate.” I used the term, “indifference,” because it is those times when I appear indifferent toward my wife that she is prone to question whether I love her. Is indifference the same as hate? Maybe not, but it has the appearance of being hate.

I am not sure that hate requires that one not protect or clothe the one who is hated. I suspect that Leah earned her keep. One may hate an employee but still pay him for the work that he does.



Since money contributes nothing to our love for God, there is no basis for loving money. Consequently, one can only love money at the expense of loving God. One cannot love both God and mammon at the same time without dividing one’s love between the two and thereby preferring one to the other.




If you think this is false, then my point is that you misunderstand what Christ means when He says that we must love Him.




Granted, this is a difficult concept to explain. However, as 1 John explains we love others when we love God and obey his commandments. If we agree on this definition, then we should also see that the world will describe this as hate. If you express love toward others by keeping God’s commandments, then murderers, thieves, homosexuals, adulterers, liars, and all who seek to do evil will say that you hate them. To show preference to God by keeping His commandments is to hate those who insist that we disobey those commandments.




Again, the need is to define “Love for others.” Will you agree to define “love” as “obeying God’s commandments"? If yes, then there is no error in my argument.I just drifted in here and realized I was a part of the unfolding drama. Haven't had time to read much here, but let me clarify, in brief, my position. God loves His elect and they are sinners. No better than the non elect. Did I say God hates sinners and just leave it there? Sloppy if I did, sorry.

I would agree that God hates those whom He is not going to redeem. A perfect hatred mind you. And for that matter, He could have exercised that perfect hatred toward me. Should have in my book. But thanks be to God in His book He decided to love me. Why, I cannot say. Because it pleased Him to do so is all I know. Why, I cannot say, I'm only thankful.

[lee_merrill]

Hi GB,

I would agree that God hates those whom He is not going to redeem. A perfect hatred mind you.I do mind!

In my Bible readings, I came across this Psalm yesterday:

Psalm 117:1 Praise the Lord, all you nations; extol him, all you peoples. For great is his love toward us, and the faithfulness of the Lord endures forever. Praise the Lord.

Now this almost certainly does not mean that all people should praise God, that non-elect people should praise God, because he loves elect people.

Surely this means that all people should praise God, because he loves them, he loves all people, and we should take "hate" as the opposite of affection, for instance, there are different kinds of love, and therefore different kinds of hate, we don't have to say "God hates the wicked" is the opposite of agape love...

Blessings,
Lee

[GoBahnsen]

Hi GB,

I do mind!

In my Bible readings, I came across this Psalm yesterday:

Psalm 117:1 Praise the Lord, all you nations; extol him, all you peoples. For great is his love toward us, and the faithfulness of the Lord endures forever. Praise the Lord.

Now this almost certainly does not mean that all people should praise God, that non-elect people should praise God, because he loves elect people.

Surely this means that all people should praise God, because he loves them, he loves all people, and we should take "hate" as the opposite of affection, for instance, there are different kinds of love, and therefore different kinds of hate, we don't have to say "God hates the wicked" is the opposite of agape love...

Blessings,
LeeHi Lee,

You know we gotta compare Scripture with Scripture:Psa 11:5 The LORD trieth the righteous: but the wicked and him that loveth violence his soul hateth. Psa 5:5 The foolish shall not stand in thy sight: thou hatest all workers of iniquity.

I think that it can be argued that God's love is great toward all those that read that Psalm with "ears to hear". That Psalm is directed to the people of God, not just Jews, but all people who fear the Lord. And that is the message of the Gospel, peace to every soul that believes and wrath and indignation upon every unbelieving heart.

"He that believeth and is baptized shall be saved, he that believeth not shall be damned" How do you damn your loved ones?

[lee_merrill]

Hi GB,

You know we gotta compare Scripture with Scripture:Psa 11:5 The LORD trieth the righteous: but the wicked and him that loveth violence his soul hateth. Psa 5:5 The foolish shall not stand in thy sight: thou hatest all workers of iniquity.Well, I hold that since there are different types of love, then there are different types of hate, we don't have to say that because God hates the wicked (he does), that therefore he doesn't love them in any way.

I think that it can be argued that God's love is great toward all those that read [Psalm 117] with "ears to hear". That Psalm is directed to the people of God, not just Jews, but all people who fear the Lord.Actually, it's "all people," everyone in the whole world, as far as I can see:

Psalm 117:1 Praise the Lord, all you nations; extol him, all you peoples.

Not some of all nations, or some in all nations, but all nations, and similarly with all peoples.

Psalm 67:2-4 … that your ways may be known on earth, your salvation among all nations. May the peoples praise you, O God; may all the peoples praise you. May the nations be glad and sing for joy…

I don't think the Psalmist was wanting just some nations to know God's ways, nor just some people to praise God, or just some nations to sing…

Psalm 67:5-7 May the peoples praise you, O God; may all the peoples praise you. Then the land will yield its harvest, and God, our God, will bless us. God will bless us, and all the ends of the earth will fear him.

Here "us" means just God's chosen people, so "all peoples" must include people who were not in Israel, "all the ends of the earth," no corner left out…

"He that believeth and is baptized shall be saved, he that believeth not shall be damned" How do you damn your loved ones?God will indeed condemn the wicked. I hope he will save them, too. But that's a different topic!

Blessings,
Lee

[rhutchin]

Hi Lee,

You know we gotta compare Scripture with Scripture:Psa 11:5 The LORD trieth the righteous: but the wicked and him that loveth violence his soul hateth. Psa 5:5 The foolish shall not stand in thy sight: thou hatest all workers of iniquity.

I think that it can be argued that God's love is great toward all those that read that Psalm with "ears to hear". That Psalm is directed to the people of God, not just Jews, but all people who fear the Lord. And that is the message of the Gospel, peace to every soul that believes and wrath and indignation upon every unbelieving heart.

"He that believeth and is baptized shall be saved, he that believeth not shall be damned" How do you damn your loved ones?

I think Lee has a point. GB's citation helps explain what Christ said when He said that we must hate father and mother etc., more so we are to hate the enemies of God (O Lord, do I not hate those who hate you, and despise those who oppose you?). At the same time, Chirst requires that we love our enemies. We hate those who hate God but we love them because God has told us to love them. There is a distinction here that Lee has correctly sought to distinguish at least from the human side. I think part of the problem is that we humans view love and hate as emotions that express how we react to others. This is not how we should apply hate and love to God, but I am not sure how to explain what love and hate are from God's perspective.

[smaller]

I think Lee has a point. GB's citation helps explain what Christ said when He said that we must hate father and mother etc., more so we are to hate the enemies of God (O Lord, do I not hate those who hate you, and despise those who oppose you?). At the same time, Chirst requires that we love our enemies. We hate those who hate God but we love them because God has told us to love them. There is a distinction here that Lee has correctly sought to distinguish at least from the human side. I think part of the problem is that we humans view love and hate as emotions that express how we react to others. This is not how we should apply hate and love to God, but I am not sure how to explain what love and hate are from God's perspective.

When God says He Hates He means it. It does not mean "love less."

God hates the devil, yet God made "all things." So how then does the "devil" serve God???

The first principle in this matter is that "all things" serve God because He is Greater. Therefore in His Greatness He will show how evil and sin, vile and putrid as they are, will SERVE HIS PURPOSES no different than the "resistance" that worked in Pharoah only serves to allow God to show His Overwhelming and Surpassing Glory Above and Beyond such vile and putrid things.

When Jesus spoke to the Pharisees and called them of their father, the devil, do you really think He was speaking to the Pharisees???

No.

Jesus spoke to other entities in mankind that mankind are "bound with."

It was not the enemies that could be seen who were the enemies of Israel. Their "real" enemies were those things that are "IN THEM" that are "NOT THEM."

Paul called this "principle" sin indwelling him that was rightfully determined to be "NO LONGER I."

These things are the things we are to HATE. Not our fellow, mankind.

There are "invisible powers" called the devil and his messengers, the "gods" of this present wicked and evil "generation." These things have not yet passed away. Mystery Babylon is "his figurative wife." Jezebel is "his figurative daughter." Demons are "his figurative sons."

Even "we" who are believers have these things working in us as well. Our flesh is "subject to them." We are bound to these things and we should rightly HATE these things and LOSE these things and NOT ASSOCIATE with these "things."

Separate MANKIND from the SIN INDWELLING THEM and you will see the scriptures in their PROPER LIGHT.

enjoy!

smaller