Is the Love of God Universal?

"Everyone who is arrogant in heart is an abomination to the Lord; be assured, he will not go unpunished" (Proverbs 16:5). 

I continue to deal almost daily with people who proclaim that God loves everyone, or even that God loves everyone equally. This is supposed to be an appeal to the wicked, making them confident in trusting God. Yet such people never seem to consider how it sounds to the wicked: "God loves you unconditionally, in your wickedness." It is a statement to the unbeliever that his wickedness costs him nothing, because God is happy with him as he is. I don't doubt that is why there is so much unrepented wickedness in the church, especially sexual immorality and illegitimacy. God loves them; therefore, God loves their wickedness. If any Christian calls the wicked to repentance, he faces this prior false information, making true evangelism an even greater uphill battle.

Yet the scriptures say no such thing. Not ever. Not anywhere. If you ask for biblical justification you will usually get one of two verses. The universalist will often refer to I John 4:8: "God is love." But to whom is John speaking there? The first part of the sentence is rarely quoted: "Anyone who does not love does not know God." The love of God is explicitly named as something that the unbeliever cannot know! The other verse the universalist will toss out is Matthew 5:45: "He makes His sun rise on the evil and on the good, and sends rain on the just and on the unjust." See, we are told, God loves both the good and the evil. That is in spite of the observable fact that "love" never appears in the verse. Rather, it is a simple reference to the mixed nature of humanity, with God's people dispersed among the wicked, as is also described in the Parable of the Weeds (Matthew 13:24-30). This is not a blessing intended for the wicked. They are merely enjoying their being in the proximity of the elect (Matthew 15:27). If anything, it is a curse, because it increases their judgment (Romans 1:21). 

The real issue is humanism, a philosophical commitment to the inherent goodness and autonomy of man. In the Bible, man is neither good nor autonomous. He is not a creature who can assume God's love, because that love cannot exclude God's love for Himself. That means that God is jealous of His holiness (Deuteronomy 4:24, Hebrews 12:29). He hates that which is contrary to His holiness, so that every man is by nature a subject of wrath, not love (Ephesians 2:3). What the unbeliever needs is not to be told that God loves him unconditionally, but that he faces an eternity of wrath, unless he clothes himself in the righteousness of Christ (II Corinthians 5:21), which comes through faith alone. God loves the believer, not because he is naturally good, but because the Father sees the believer in His Son, who alone is inherently and unfailingly good (Romans 5:8). 

The Nature of God: Biblical Versus the Corporeal Deity of Mormonism

"The right hand of the Lord does valiantly!" (Psalm 118:15).

The reference above mentions the right hand of God. We also see references to His arm and His back. Orthodox Christians call these references "anthropomorphisms," that is, metaphorical references to God as if He is a man, as an aid to human understanding. In other words, we say that they are never to be taken literally (apart from the true body of Jesus, but only as the result of His incarnation). 

In contrast, Mormons claim that they references are literally true, such that the Father has a literal, physical body, with hands, feet, hair, etc., and that the Son also had a body, even prior to His incarnation. On the other hand, their Holy Spirit does not have a body. As their scriptures say, "The Father has a body of flesh and bones, as tangible as man's; the Son also" (Doctrine and Covenants 130:22). 

However, something else we see in the Bible is this: "The Lord spoke to you out of the midst of the fire. You heard the sound of the words, but saw no form - only a voice was heard... Give good care to yourselves, for you saw no form on the day that the Lord spoke to you in Horeb from the midst of the fire, lest you corrupt yourselves in the form of any figure, the likeness of male or female..." (Deuteronomy 4: 12, 15-16). These verses are significant because they explicitly state that God did not reveal Himself with any form. In fact, Moses says, to represent Him with a form would be corruption! What I find even more significant is that He calls Himself Yahweh (represented here by the English word "Lord"), which I consider to be, not the Father, but rather the preincarnate Son in His mediatorial role. Whether or not one agrees, these verses plainly negate the claims of Mormons. 

On the issue of anthropomorphisms, that chapter contains another relevant reference: "I call heaven and earth to witness against you today..." (Deuteronomy 4:26). Moses calls on the physical creation to witness the commitment undertaken by the people of Israel. Taken literally, that would require that heaven and earth be sentient. Yet Mormons make no claim that anthropomorphisms are literal in this case. 

Does that not prove that they recognize the validity of the orthodox view? They must deny it, however, because to accept it would bring down the house of cards which is their manmade religion in a single stroke. 

Jesus the Shepherd and Effectual Calling

"That saying of Christ is much to our purpose: 'And other sheep I have, them also I must bring, and they shall hear My voice' (John 10:16). This must imports a duty not to be dispensed with. He had 'received a commandment for it from the Father' (verse 18), and this shall [imports] that effectual working 'whereby He subdues all things to Himself,' and whereby they are made to believe (Eph. 1:19). The sheep of themselves lie as cross to this work as other men. 'What have I to do with Thee?' cries the possessed Gadarene (Mark 5:7), but, being His sheep, He must make them willing (Psalm 110:3)." - Elisha Coles, "A Practical Discourse of God's Sovereignty" (emphasis in the original). 

A common Arminian objection to the doctrines of grace is their claim that "God has given us free will." And by that phrase, they mean a level of sovereignty, such that each man is able to chose God for himself or to reject God for himself, and God takes a hands-off attitude toward that decision. 

First, there is no such sovereignty. On the contrary, it was a false offer of sovereignty that Satan made to Adam and Eve in the first temptation. Satan said that a declaration of independence would enable them to decide for themselves what is good or what is evil. Yet, somehow, Arminians are unconcerned that their claim is the same as that made by Satan, by which he deprived the first couple of their blissful existence in the garden of Eden. And second, nowhere does the Bible say that men have any such authority. It is God's authority alone to determine right and wrong. 

Notice the scriptural citations in the quote above from Puritan Coles. Jesus is the shepherd, and His people are sheep. In the anti-type of that metaphor, it is the shepherd who selects his sheep, not the sheep who choose a shepherd. So it is with Jesus's sheep. His flock consists of those given to Him by the Father in their prehistoric intra-Trinitarian covenant (John 6:37-37). And, as Coles notes, Jesus never left the result to the sheep. Rather, He declared His divine intent, one which must be achieved, and the means shall be arranged, and the sheep will be brought into their eternal fold. Not once does the divine shepherd express a mere hope that the sheep will agree or that His calling would achieve its end. Rather, He expresses an unfailing assurance that such will definitely be the case: "This is the will of Him who sent Me, that I should lose nothing of all that He has given Me, but raise it up on the last day" (John 6:39, see also John 17:24).

Grace and the Means of Election

"If grace be perfectly free in choosing, it must be answerably free in giving and applying the means to bring about the end it hath chosen us to. For if the effect of the means should depend upon something to be done by men, which grace is not the doer of, then works would put in for a share in the glory of men's salvation. and so, the grace of God would be dethroned, and be as if it were not." --Elisha Coles, "A Practical Discourse of God's Sovereignty"

One will often hear the worst of the Arminians say that God has done "everything that He could" to save everybody. Then, they claim, it is up to the individual to accept or refuse what God has done. I have even seen a tract designed like a ballot: "Will you go to Heaven? God votes 'yes.' Satan votes 'no.' It's a tie! The deciding vote is yours." An example can be seen here. The blasphemy is appalling! As if the will of Satan or of a man is equal to God's will, or even has a veto over it! 

Instead, as Puritan Coles says above, election includes all of the means necessary for attaining its purpose. That is, God votes "yes" (or "no," as the case may be), and no other vote is entered. In prehistory, the Father chose a race to give to the Son to be redeemed and to the Holy Spirit to be regenerated unto new life. That choice isn't just for the first domino, with a hope that the rest of the dominoes will fall in the desired pattern. No, each domino is placed by the triune God, so that each step is infallibly achieved (John 6:27-39). The Puritans called this the Golden Chain of Redemption, from Paul's words in Romans 8:29-30: "Those whom He foreknew He also predestined to be conformed to the image of His Son, in order that He might be the firstborn among many brothers. And those whom He predestined He also called, and those whom He called He also justified, and those whom He justified He also glorified." Notice where the chain starts, that it is for the sake of Jesus, not of us. That is where Arminianism fails to address the Scriptures on this issue. The Arminian wants to reserve some level of autonomy for man, such that salvation is for man's sake. It isn't, because man isn't. God's plan is centered on Jesus, and the elect are a means to that end. God's Gospel is Christ-centered, while that of the Arminian is man-centered, and, therefore, false.

Faith, Holiness, Assurance, and the Covenant of Grace

"This covenant [of grace] does not only give life upon terms of believing, but faith also and holiness the necessary means of attaining that [eternal] life. And this not upon your ingenious [sic, for "ingenuous"] compliance, as some term it, or better improvement of what you have in common with other men, (such allegations the Lord disallows, and often cautions against), but of grace. It is a covenant made up of promises, and promise, by scripture intention, is always free, both freely made and freely performed, without the desert or procurement of men." --Elisha Coles, "A Practical Discourse of God's Sovereignty" 

The difference between biblical Christianity and any of its competitors is that it stands on that great principle: Justification is by grace alone through faith alone in Christ alone for the glory of God alone. Every other religion, whether it falsely claims to be Christian or it is a distinctly-named religion, makes salvation based on the good works of the supplicant, whether in part or in whole. 

That is because the true Christian is aware that he has nothing in himself by which he can appeal to God as worthy of salvation. In answer, as the Puritan Coles says above, Jesus purchased everything, not just justification itself, but also the faith with which we respond and the holiness which it produces. By grace, He purchased them on the cross for everyone that the Father had given Him to be redeemed, and His blood cannot fail to achieve its purpose (John 6:37-39).

In contrast, the unbeliever is dead in trespasses and sins (Ephesians 2:1, Romans 3:23), and thereby under the just wrath of God (Ephesians 2:3, Romans 6:23). It is impossible for such a wretch to offer anything of himself to the offended God, because only a believer can do anything of spiritual good (Romans 14:23, Hebrews 12:14). The Father, apart from the intercession of the blood of Jesus, refuses even to look in love on such a one: "[God's] eyes are too pure to look on evil, and You cannot look on wickedness" (Habakkuk 1:13). Alas, even the prayers of the unbeliever are repugnant to Him (Proverbs 28:9). 

For those for whom Jesus died, that holy flood washed away our sins, the judgment for our sins, and purchased for us faith and holiness. It is only in Him that we can have hope, and have assurance that our hope is on a sound foundation.