Psalm 5 - Does God love everybody?


So you consider love to be "rape".
Thank you for the warped clarification.


He is the Potter, we are the clay.
Did He ASK the clay if it wanted to be a vessel of honour?

Did the Shepherd ASK the sheep if he wanted to be part of the flock?


Disagree.


I don't believe in "luck".

So I guess if people were floating unconscious in the Atlantic when the Titanic died, the rescuers shouldn't have saved them without their "permission", because you think life-saving is the same as "rape".

Seems your God is is far more unloving (not to mention REALLY messed up in the head) than my Loving God.


It's sad that you have to try to rationalize theolgy (and in a VERY uncharitable way), rather than simply accept what God has revealed in Scripture.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Welcome to CARM!

The Bible says God Hated Esau. The reason why God Hated Esau can be debated; but it shows that God doesn't Love everyone. Couple this with the Bible saying God does not Change, thus we are not destroyed; and you can have the belief that God does not have an Agape Love for everyone...

This is an example of Systematic Theology in use. The Bible says God is Love; so people use that Verbatim Verse to try and prove that God cannot Hate anyone. Stand Alone Verses are true; as far as how the Holy Spirit meant them to be true. The Verse which says God Hated Esau is JUST AS TRUE as the Verse which says God is Love. So what are we to do? We are supposed to believe both of the Verses...
Excellent!

And all the people said, ?????????
 
Yesterday, my family was reading through Psalm 5. Afterwards, my daughter asked a question, based on verse 5 "The boastful shall not stand before your eyes; you hate all evildoers."

She said "Sure that must mean that God hates what the evildoers do, because God loves everybody, right?"

What are your thoughts?
Welcome to CARM!
You’re about to enter the twilight zone!
Enter at your own risk!
 
Yesterday, my family was reading through Psalm 5. Afterwards, my daughter asked a question, based on verse 5 "The boastful shall not stand before your eyes; you hate all evildoers."

She said "Sure that must mean that God hates what the evildoers do, because God loves everybody, right?"

What are your thoughts?

Sounds like a good discussion; but because of the OP (the new guy), I feel I should wait for him...

Mostly, every Poster will agree that God Hates Esau...

It could be some kind of weird mix of love and hate, I guess, with God both loving and "hating" Esau. It would seem like a "love - hate relationship," I guess.

So for example, Psalm 5 says, "you hate all evildoers."
And Romans 5:8 says: God proves his own love for us in that while we were still sinners, Christ died for us."

But it's also worth getting into the text language in the original.

Romans 9:13 says that God loved Jacob and hated Esau.
The Greek word is miseó

But this seems ambiguous compared to the English word hate.

HELP's word studies says:
3404 miséō – properly, to detest (on a comparative basis); hence, denounce; to love someone or something less than someone (something) else, i.e. to renounce one choice in favor of another.

Lk 14:26: "If anyone comes to Me, and does not hate (3404 /miséō, 'love less' than the Lord) his own father and mother and wife and children and brothers and sisters, yes, and even his own life, he cannot be My disciple" (NASU).

[Note the comparative meaning of 3404 (miséō) which centers in moral choice, elevating one value over another.]
It seems to me that even if Hate is not necessarily wrong in the KJV, to just leave the discussion at that and see the hatred as categorical and absolute would be linguistically misleading for the Greek.
 
Yesterday, my family was reading through Psalm 5. Afterwards, my daughter asked a question, based on verse 5 "The boastful shall not stand before your eyes; you hate all evildoers."

She said "Sure that must mean that God hates what the evildoers do, because God loves everybody, right?"

What are your thoughts?
“No one can serve two masters; for either he will hate the one and love the other, or he will be devoted to one and despise the other. You cannot serve God and wealth.”

Are we to hate Satan or just love him less than we love Jesus?
 
Yesterday, my family was reading through Psalm 5. Afterwards, my daughter asked a question, based on verse 5 "The boastful shall not stand before your eyes; you hate all evildoers."

She said "Sure that must mean that God hates what the evildoers do, because God loves everybody, right?"

What are your thoughts?
My thoughts are it's awesome that you share the word of God with your family and that they are receptive to it. Train up a child in the way they should go and when they get older they want to part from it. Proverbs 22:6

The serious offer of God’s Love toward His fallen creation is my favorite subject. It amazes me that the creator of the universe knew as He formed us out of mud that he would one day die on a cross for us. Now that's amazing love! This offer of God’s love was made to “whosoevers.”

“That whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but have eternal life.” John 3: 15

God did not offer His love just to the Jews or just to the Gentiles, but to “whosoever”—to everybody in the world. A whole lot of theological discussions have taken place here at carm and down through history over this question... Who is a “whosoever?” Did Christ die for the sins of every person in the world or just for the sins of those who would believe in Him?

The Bible says that Christ “is the propitiation for our sins, and not for ours only but also for the whole world” (1 John 2:2). Enough grace and love was poured out at the Cross to cover the needs of every person in the world. It doesn’t matter where or who you are —God loves you and Christ died for you on the cross. The words of the Bible don’t seem to make much sense taken any other way.

But lo and behold there is a selective choice of God’s Love. The words that follow “whosoever” don’t limit to whom the love of God is offered, but they do define it by whom it is received and enjoyed: the ones who believe in Christ. The grace of God is sufficient for all but is efficient only for those who believe in Christ. The offer is to everyone who will receive it. It’s as if you walk into a crowded room full of people and announce the offer of a free gift for everyone in the room. The only ones who get to enjoy and benefit from the gift are those who step forward and receive it.

So it is with the Gospel. Those who step forward by faith and receive God’s gift - Jesus Christ - are the ones who benefit from it. That doesn’t mean the offer wasn’t valid for the rest, and it doesn’t mean the offer is withdrawn. The offer of salvation in Christ goes forth continually in the present tense for “whosoever” will reach out his hand and accept it. Those who reject the gift are still loved by God, still have a chance to receive it. But until they do, God’s gift remains in the “sufficient” category, not the “efficient.” “Whosoever” includes the whole world, but “whosoever believes” excludes those who don’t believe from the possibility of benefiting from God’s gift of salvation.

Then you have my second favorite topic... a nice walk in the park through the doctrine of predestination for those who are destined for salvation.
 
1. God hatred of Esau, as expressed in the Scriptures, is a symbolic representation of those who willing reject the revelation of Jesus Christ.
Prove it is symbolic.

Here is a clue that it is not:
Rom_9:8 This means that it is not the children of the flesh who are the children of God, but the children of the promise are counted as offspring.
Gal_4:28 Now you, brothers, like Isaac, are children of promise.

If your argument is that children of the promise and children of the flesh are only symbolic you must provide scripture.

Here is the promise:

Gen 21:8 And the child grew and was weaned. And Abraham made a great feast on the day that Isaac was weaned.
Gen 21:9 But Sarah saw the son of Hagar the Egyptian, whom she had borne to Abraham, laughing.
Gen 21:10 So she said to Abraham, “Cast out this slave woman with her son, for the son of this slave woman shall not be heir with my son Isaac.”
Gen 21:11 And the thing was very displeasing to Abraham on account of his son.
Gen 21:12 But God said to Abraham, “Be not displeased because of the boy and because of your slave woman. Whatever Sarah says to you, do as she tells you, for through Isaac shall your offspring be named.
Gen 21:13 And I will make a nation of the son of the slave woman also, because he is your offspring.”

God made a promise to Abraham before Ishmael was born. The nation God chose would come through the children of the promise (Isaac)
In unbelief, 14 years prior to the birth of Isaac, and in the flesh, Sarah decided to give her slave to Abraham and she bore Ishmael, the child of the flesh.

As for Esau:
Gen 28:8 So when Esau saw that the Canaanite women did not please Isaac his father,
Gen 28:9 Esau went to Ishmael and took as his wife, besides the wives he had, Mahalath the daughter of Ishmael, Abraham's son, the sister of Nebaioth.

Gen_36:12 (Timna was a concubine of Eliphaz, Esau's son; she bore Amalek to Eliphaz.) These are the sons of Adah, Esau's wife.
Gen_36:16 Korah, Gatam, and Amalek; these are the chiefs of Eliphaz in the land of Edom; these are the sons of Adah.
Exo_17:11 Whenever Moses held up his hand, Israel prevailed, and whenever he lowered his hand, Amalek prevailed.
Exo_17:13 And Joshua overwhelmed Amalek and his people with the sword.
Exo_17:14 Then the LORD said to Moses, “Write this as a memorial in a book and recite it in the ears of Joshua, that I will utterly blot out the memory of Amalek from under heaven.”
Exo_17:16 saying, “A hand upon the throne of the LORD! The LORD will have war with Amalek from generation to generation.”

There is no symbolism that a child of the flesh is symbolic of those who choose not to believe, or any symbolism that a child of the promise is someone who chooses to believe.

It is about the mercy of God and His choice.
 
Thanks for all the responses. As I know where I posted, I assumed there would be a large variety of answers. The original verse was focused on God "hating." I mentioned to my daughter, that there are different meanings to words. I said it could be a feeling towards a group, but it could also be the actions, meaning that God acts against evildoers. However, my question was more about the fundamental belief she had about how "God loves everybody". Words must be read in context. This is how we derive the meaning. I told her that there is a way in which God loves everybody. This would be in the grace He shows us all. We deserve wrath, but we get rain, health, food, etc. Of course, saving grace isn't shown to all, unless you hold to universalism. I think my daughter has heard so often, that God loves everybody, that she can't imagine that there would be a way that God could "hate" a person. Also, there is the other well-known phrase to "hate the sin and not the sinner". It isn't an easy topic to address, because there is so much folk theology going around and many don't want to wrestle with the "tough" verses. They just want to make sure God still sounds nice and loving. That means ignoring a lot of the bible, though.
 
Thanks for all the responses. As I know where I posted, I assumed there would be a large variety of answers. The original verse was focused on God "hating." I mentioned to my daughter, that there are different meanings to words. I said it could be a feeling towards a group, but it could also be the actions, meaning that God acts against evildoers. However, my question was more about the fundamental belief she had about how "God loves everybody". Words must be read in context. This is how we derive the meaning. I told her that there is a way in which God loves everybody. This would be in the grace He shows us all. We deserve wrath, but we get rain, health, food, etc. Of course, saving grace isn't shown to all, unless you hold to universalism. I think my daughter has heard so often, that God loves everybody, that she can't imagine that there would be a way that God could "hate" a person. Also, there is the other well-known phrase to "hate the sin and not the sinner". It isn't an easy topic to address, because there is so much folk theology going around and many don't want to wrestle with the "tough" verses. They just want to make sure God still sounds nice and loving. That means ignoring a lot of the bible, though.
What's awesome is that your daughter is thinking about this stuff now. Therefore she's going to learn the truth now and that truth will set her free. At any time in her life someone tries to get her to believe the lie, she's going to know better. And on top of that she'll be able to teach the truth.
 
The Bible doesn't use the word "hate" as narrowly as we use it. For example, Jesus says in Luke 14:26, “If anyone comes to Me and does not hate his father and mother, wife and children, brothers and sisters, yes, and his own life also, he cannot be My disciple." It is universally understood by all Christians, regardless of whether they are Calvinist or Arminian, that Jesus is not teaching we should hate our families in the way that we typically use the word "hate." The more natural interpretation of this verse is that to be hated is to be less preferred. Thus, by saying we should hate our families, Jesus is simply saying that we should prefer Him and His kingdom over our loved ones and their interests.
Another way to see it is that we love Jesus so much that our love for family is perceived as hate. (We are talking A LOT of love for Christ.)
 
You mean this lie: God loves everyone in that he sends rain to all, but did not taste death for all.
Are you speaking of Schrodinger's person? You know, some guy is walking down the street and it starts to rain. Is he righteous or unrighteous? And are you pushing universalism? I mean really?
 
Are you speaking of Schrodinger's person? You know, some guy is walking down the street and it starts to rain. Is he righteous or unrighteous? And are you pushing universalism? I mean really?
Do you mean universalism as in:
a) God sends rain to all.
b) God tastes death for all.
c) God saves all.

You are conflating b) and c); God tastes death for all, does not mean God saves all.
 
Do you mean universalism as in:
a) God sends rain to all.
b) God tastes death for all.
c) God saves all.

You are conflating b) and c); God tastes death for all, does not mean God saves all.
And I say that God tastes death for all by definition means God saves all.
 
And I say that God tastes death for all by definition means God saves all.
You are still conflating.

God taste death for all:
Heb 2:9 But we see Jesus, who was made a little lower than the angels for the suffering of death, crowned with glory and honour; that he by the grace of God should taste death for every man.

God saves those who believe:
1Cor 1:21 For after that in the wisdom of God the world by wisdom knew not God, it pleased God by the foolishness of preaching to save them that believe.
 
You are still conflating.

God taste death for all:
Heb 2:9 But we see Jesus, who was made a little lower than the angels for the suffering of death, crowned with glory and honour; that he by the grace of God should taste death for every man.

God saves those who believe:
1Cor 1:21 For after that in the wisdom of God the world by wisdom knew not God, it pleased God by the foolishness of preaching to save them that believe.
" 9 But we see Jesus, who for a little while was made lower than the angels, crowned with glory and honor because of the suffering of death, so that by the grace of God he might taste death for every one.

10 For it was fitting that he, for whom and by whom all things exist, in bringing many sons to glory, should make the pioneer of their salvation perfect through suffering. "

Verse 10 seems to limit what every one means down to many sons. This is by the "make the pioneer of their salvation perfect through suffering." I don't think it is a huge stretch to link taste death to suffering, which would mean that this is who is being spoke of when it says every one. The Bible does this a lot.
 
" 9 But we see Jesus, who for a little while was made lower than the angels, crowned with glory and honor because of the suffering of death, so that by the grace of God he might taste death for every one.

10 For it was fitting that he, for whom and by whom all things exist, in bringing many sons to glory, should make the pioneer of their salvation perfect through suffering. "

Verse 10 seems to limit what every one means down to many sons. This is by the "make the pioneer of their salvation perfect through suffering." I don't think it is a huge stretch to link taste death to suffering, which would mean that this is who is being spoke of when it says every one. The Bible does this a lot.
Who are those sons; they are those who believed. Neither you nor I believed when Christ tasted death for us.
We are not saved until we believe.
1Cor 1:21 For after that in the wisdom of God the world by wisdom knew not God, it pleased God by the foolishness of preaching to save them that believe.
 
Who are those sons; they are those who believed. Neither you nor I believed when Christ tasted death for us.
We are not saved until we believe.
1Cor 1:21 For after that in the wisdom of God the world by wisdom knew not God, it pleased God by the foolishness of preaching to save them that believe.
I'm a calvinist, and due to eternity, we were understood to believe when Christ tasted death for us. Once again, someone who doesn't fully comprehend the idea of eternity. Granted, no one truly understands it.
 
Back
Top