Does God love people in hell?

All right. I am not sure where it teaches what you said but that is ok. Let me ask you this. Do you agree that God also hates those who sin while He loves them?
psalm 5:5 The foolish shall not stand in thy sight: thou hatest all workers of iniquity.

 

Yes.

I presume you are asking this from my perspective and not from a Calvinistic one...In which case they would be reaping the consequences of unbelief, not merely the curse of the fall. And I suppose that argument could be made regarding God's grief, but, IMO, it would be more consistent with scripture's revelation than the alternative of God pretending like he is lovely pleading with lost men to be saved when really he doesn't.

I don't even pretend to understand how God grieves or feels with regard to emotions. I suspect eternity will be much different than any of us have imagined. I have a feeling God's mercy and grace will astound us beyond even what scripture has yet to reveal.

 

We don't have to pretend. We're told. God will wipe away all tears from our eyes. There is no grieving.

 

I think the hatred is more directed at the iniquity itself. God's wrath is best understood, in my view, as the full weight of God's anger being brought against that which destroys the objects of God's affection. Sin destroys people and God loves people. Much more could be said, but hopefully that answers the question.

 

There are tears and greiving in heaven until He wipes them away and that time has not happened yet.
Rev 7:16
Rev. 21:4

 

I understand that you can make the choice to say that, but that is not what the text says. I always find it interesting that when God says something that we do not want to believe it becomes fashionable to make the word say something else. In other words explain it away. For me that is a dangerous thing to do, but like I said that is your choice.
By the way sin is not an entity. Sin is a result of a willful choice and man makes that choice. God is not judging sin. He will however judge the sinner.

 

What you have a problem with is called "Hermeneutics." You have in one passage God saying he loves the world and love your enemies and in another saying "don't love the world." In one passage you have Paul teaching we are saved by faith apart from works and in another James teaching that we are saved by faith and works. In one passage we are called slaves and servants of God and in another Jesus says "I no longer call you servants, but friends." You have Jesus saying "you have heard it said ....but now I tell you."

Are these contradictions? Or does revelation progress to give us more and more insight into our God? Paul understood more than Abraham, but does that mean truth changed or God changed? No. The revelation increased and more of God was revealed. The coming of the Holy Spirit brought more understanding, which didn't negate the OT or the law, but fulfilled it and helped to explain its intent.

I say all of this because it is easy to pluck a verse (especially one in the OT) out of its context to make it say something about God that is not necessarily completely consistent with all we know of God because of the revelation of Christ. Again, much more could be said, and I'm sure people will read unfounded intents into what I've said here, but anyone who practices Hermeneutics is doing this whether they admit it or not.

 

Again, that seems to be just playing with words, to me. He "loves" them, but they are in eternal inescapable torment-- so His love is useless, then. And in case you are thinking love as described in I Corinthians 13, there is absolutely nothing of that applied to those in hell-- not patience, no kindness,...

So if God loves those in hell, as you claim, define love within that concept.

 

He was patient and longsuffering toward them, not wanting any to perish but all to come to repentance. That is a display of love, but love doesn't negate judgement for those who refuse his appeal to believe and be saved, does it?

Are you arguing that God loved them for a time but once they died he stopped? I'm not sure this is incorrect, it just doesn't seem consistent with the biblical understanding of "love" to me.

 

okay.

But I think this is a narrow view. You see, you say they will be reaping the consequences of unbelief. So now you have God dispensing love and justice to those who believe and not believe. Yet Paul asks : ......how shall they believe in him of whom they have not heard ? and how shall they hear without a preacher ?

In the time of Paul, in the time of Christ, in the time of the first New Testament church, many did not believe among those whom they reached with the gospel, and many other men in various continents, islands, and countries had nothing to believe in because no one preached to them about an Almighty God who condescended to live among His subjects.

So, now, you are saying that God loved them all the way to hell, and will grieve for them through eternity, despite Him knowing that they cannot believe because they have nothing to believe. That makes God a hypocrite.

And please don't point me to that Romans passage about men knowing God thru His creation because we need to remember the questions Paul asks is many chapters in the same letter after that statement which the same Paul made.

So, what are you insinuating here ?
Are you saying that maybe in the unknown eternity future God might decide that He has punished those souls in hell enough and His love will no longer allow Him to listen to their cries of anguish ?

 

Douglas V. Henry, Director of The Center for Christian Ethics:

http://www.baylor.edu/christianethics/HeavenHellarticleHenry.pdf

 

Well, narrow is the way to heaven, so I must be on the right path...

So this is about those who don't hear the gospel who go to hell? Ok, we can discuss that.

Actually, I'm just reading what scripture reveals about God's love for all mankind (as even MacArthur and historical Reformers acknowledge)

I never said that. I said that I don't even pretend to know about such things. I think it is plausiable what others said here about God "wiping away the tears" as meaning he will bring an end to grief.

But I believe that someone can be justified for belief in the level of revelation they receive, which is why no one has an excuse. This article explains what I believe more fully...

Just what I said, that God's grace, love and mercy will astound us beyond what we could ever even imagine. Read whatever you want into that. I just think we underestimate how truly loving our God is...and whether you believe it or not that is from a guy who majored most of his life on God's commands, wrath and justice.

 

So, what's he patient and long-suffering for? What is he waiting on, Himself?

It makes little since for God to patiently wait for a man who can only come when God effectually draws him. I guess God is patient with himself.

 

reformation

I like to hear more about this I thought I heard reformers say Baptist was after the reformation or from it.

 

But the fact that you don't even affirm his love for non-elect while on earth, (as do the reformers mentioned in MacArthur's article) proves your inconsistency with historical reformed views on the subject of God's love for the reprobate whether in hell yet or not, and considering that the Reformers mantra is that "God does not change" its interesting to suggest that Reformers believed that God does love a reprobate pre-death but not post-death, is that what you think they believe?

 

now why should anyone always have to be in step with the reformers mentioned in McArthur's article, if I may ask on behalf of OB ? Do they set the dictum for anyone ?

 

They don't. If you read back through the thread I mentioned that not all reformers agreed with many of the Calvinistic posters and then was asked to produce evidence that there are those of the reformed persuasion that disagree, so I did...