April, 2021
Have you ever noticed that what is “not said” is often just as important, if not more so, than what is said? Every day, we are bombarded with information from many sources. And every day, we receive selected news and information. Often, we aren’t allowed to choose what news interests us because someone else decides that for us. It takes discernment and discipline to think deeply about what we are told and what is left out. “It’s what they don’t say” that is usually more important than what they do say. Have you ever noticed that?
This clearly applies to major media outlets. Let me give just one example related to the media. A recent NYT article discussed the 11,000 annual deaths from gun violence, framing it as an epidemic that demands our immediate attention, while late-term abortions (with an annual death figure of 10,487) are described as “rare” and not worth discussing. That’s what the NYT didn’t say! They don’t mention the number of babies murdered in late-term abortions, nor do they explain the gun deaths. How many gun deaths were accidental? How many were in self-defense? And they say nothing about the number of crimes prevented because someone used a gun to stop violence or theft. How many lives are saved each year by guns used for protection? The newspaper clearly doesn’t want to provide that perspective. They want to brainwash the public. It’s often what they omit that matters more than what they include.
You will notice that my headline for this article asks the question about the nature of God’s love. The title suggests, as do most pastors, that there are two options regarding the love of God. It is either conditional or unconditional. That is another example, from the world of theology, of “what they don’t say” that is most important. Who says there are only two options?
Another secular specimen, where the headline itself is misleading, pertains to the discussion about evolution and the “fossil record”. Evolutionists love to talk about the “missing links” in evolution. Again, “it’s what they don’t say”, that is most important. Who says there are missing links in the fossil record? Evolutionists, who need transitional forms of life to be found to validate their theory, claim there are missing links. Understand my point? There are no missing links in the fossil “record”; there are just a bunch of fossils. And if the millions of fossils that we have found, evidence no intermediary fossils, then that is the “fossil record”, and nothing is missing. Is that not accurate?
But they want us to think something is missing, that will prove their theory of evolution. They brainwash us with the label of “missing links.” They want us to believe that if we continue to look for these missing links, we will find them someday. Trust them, missing links do exist. They just need a few hundred more years to find them! They haven’t been able to find them so far despite their many attempts. You see, they have a theory and just need to find the evidence to support the theory. In the meantime, just assume they are correct. I suggest that you don’t believe them. It’s impossible to find something that doesn’t exist, no matter how hard you look.
This fact also applies more broadly to every facet of life, including our spiritual lives. Have you ever left church, disappointed in what was not said, that should have been said? That has happened to me many times. It’s what the pastor didn’t say! That brings us to our topic about the love of God. Over the years, I have heard much about the unconditional love of God, but is that the whole story?
Preaching about God’s unconditional love is the easiest topic because it makes everyone feel good. It requires no courage or boldness to talk about God’s unconditional love. I am reminded of how many times the Apostle Paul emphasized being bold in sharing the gospel. Does it take boldness to tell everyone that God loves them no matter what they do and how they choose to live? I don’t think so. However, preaching the full truth about God’s love does require courage and boldness, as it may upset some people.
I would have no problem believing that almost all followers of Christ think that God’s love is entirely unconditional. It’s comforting to believe that no matter what we do, God will always love us and accept us just as we are. Francis Bacon was so right when he said, “Men prefer to believe what men prefer to be true”. Men believe what they want to be true, not what is true. I see this all the time with Christian’s that change the Word of God so that it agrees with what they want to be true. Not what is true, but what they want to be true. That is usually done to allow for some compromise in their life.
How often do parents assure their prodigal kids that they will always love them, no matter what they do? What do those parents really mean by that profession of unconditional love? At a minimum, it means they will always have feelings of affection for them. But does that profession of love actually make any difference in the eternal destiny of their prodigal children? Does the love of a Christian mother and father prevent their unrepentant prodigal from going to hell? It does not.
Does God truly promise us that He will always love us regardless of what we do or how we live? Will that unconditional love from God keep us out of hell if we don’t repent of our sins and believe the gospel? Many evangelical pastors will respond by saying that forsaking our sins is not a condition of salvation. But what if the salvific love of God is conditional?
The unconditional love of God is a foundation for the belief in eternal security, according to the advocates of that doctrine. Rejecting the belief in God’s unconditional love is the same thing as stating that the love of God is conditional, which is unthinkable to most, perhaps all, of its proponents. It is many of these very same folks, in the next breath, tell us that there is “one” condition to salvation, and that is our faith. This is an argument proposed by Charles Stanley in his book on Eternal Security. This is just one of many contradictions in his book.
As just mentioned, nearly all of these same Christians believe that there is at least one condition for salvation, which is our faith. However, for many, it is just a fleeting condition; one expression of faith forever guarantees the “believer” eternal salvation. It makes little difference how ungodly and unrepentant they remain. They are blind to the contradiction in claiming that God’s love is unconditional, yet asserting that faith is a requirement.
Since many of us “mere mortals” often love unconditionally, as we do with our prodigal children, that means we demonstrate pure love to a greater extent than God. That presumes God’s love is conditional, which Stanley says is unthinkable. How absurd to think that we might love in a way that makes God look lesser. God’s love is filled with wisdom and justice, not just feelings. Often, our love, especially parental love, is simply feelings and nothing more.
The question before us is, “Is God’s love unconditional?” I suspect most believers would answer that it is. God’s love is unconditional. I agree that one aspect or one dimension of God’s love is unconditional. However, if every aspect or every dimension of God’s love is unconditional, then how do we explain the following? Consider these questions.
Is God’s condemnation of Satan and other angels, when they sinned, an example of unconditional love?
Is God’s judgment of Adam and Eve an example of God’s unconditional love? God told them that the day they ate of the tree He commanded them not to eat from, that very day they would die. They didn’t die physically that day, but they did die that day. They were kicked out of the Garden of Eden. Is that an example of the unconditional love of God? If it is, then the phrase “unconditional love” has no meaning at all.
What about the destruction of the entire world, save Noah and his family? Is that too an example of the unconditional love of God?
What about the destruction of Sodom and Gomorrah? Did God love them unconditionally, while He destroyed the cities of the plains?
What about the destruction of Israel in 721 BC, 586 BC, and 70 AD? Are these also examples of God’s unconditional love? In each of these cases, God’s destruction of His people was horrific.
I believe the truth is that God’s love is both conditional and unconditional.[1] It is not “either or” but “both and”. To suggest that there are only two options is, in itself, misleading. It’s like saying there are missing links. Let me explain.
The word “love,” like most other words in the Bible, can have different meanings based on context and subject. Love is used in various ways in scripture. God’s love is complex. The love of God that makes the rain fall and the sun shine on both the wicked and the good, the just and the unjust, is unconditional. Some call it the love of benevolence. The love of God that gave us the atonement and drives God to seek the lost is also unconditional. The atonement is for everyone, with no exceptions. God desires everyone to be saved and to spend eternity with Him. Again, it is the love of benevolence and remains unconditional.
But the love of God that expresses itself in actual personal salvation is conditional. The love of God that makes salvation a reality in our lives is conditional and only bestowed on sinners who become truly righteous by grace through faith in Jesus Christ. That includes their repentance from sin. How do we know that is a correct interpretation? Let me offer a few passages of scripture for your consideration.
“He that hath my commandments, and keepeth them, he it is that loveth me; and he that loveth me shall be loved of my Father, and I will love him, and will manifest myself to him.” John 14:21
“If a man abide not in me, he is cast forth as a branch, and is withered: and men gather them, and cast them into the fire, and they are burned. If ye abide in me, and my words abide in you, ye shall ask what ye will, and it shall be done unto you. Herein is my Father glorified, that ye bear much fruit; so shall ye be my disciples. As the Father hath loved me, so have I loved you: continue ye in my love. If ye keep my commandments, ye shall abide in my love; even as I have kept my Father’s commandments, and abide in His love”. John 15:6-10 emphasis added.
We are told, “Keep yourselves in the love of God, looking for the mercy of our Lord Jesus Christ unto eternal life.” Jude 21 emphasis added.[2]
In the book of John, Jesus told us, “to continue in his love”. It’s not automatic. He also said that keeping his commandments is necessary “to abide in his love”. Again, it’s not automatic. There is a condition we must meet to continue in His love.
Jude tells us, “to keep ourselves in the love of God”.
Why is this “continuing, abiding, commandment keeping, and keeping ourselves in the love of God” necessary or even possible if God’s love is unconditional? If we remain in God’s love, whether or not we do these things, then these passages are meaningless. Is that not accurate? All of these statements are conditional in nature and critical in importance. This is what God expects and demands of us, who are the recipients of His love. In case you are not yet convinced, please consider the following additional verses.
“Then said God, Call his name Lo-ammi: for ye are not my people, and I will not be your God”. Hosea 1:9.
“All their wickedness is in Gilgal: for there I hated them: for the wickedness of their doings I will drive them out of mine house, I will love them no more: all their princes are revolters”. Hosea 9:15
“Thou shalt say then, the branches were broken off, that I might be grafted in. Well; because of unbelief they were broken off, and thou standest by faith. Be not high-minded, but fear: for if God spared not the natural branches, take heed lest he also spare not thee. Behold therefore the goodness and severity of God; but toward thee, goodness, if thou continue in his goodness: otherwise thou also shalt be cut off. And they also, if they abide not still in unbelief, shall be grafted in: For God is able to graft them in again.” Romans 11:19-23
In the Book of Hosea, the prophet was given a message from God to His people, the children of Israel. God’s patience had run out. The light of mercy was extinguished. God declared that Israel was no longer His people and He was no longer their God. Then God says, “I will love them no more.” I don’t know how it gets any clearer, God’s salvific love is conditional.
In the book of Romans, Paul talked about God’s rejection of His covenant people (Israel) because of their stubborn unbelief and God’s inclusion of the Gentiles because of their abiding faith. The promise remains that Israel can be grafted back in by faith. The threat remains that Gentiles will be cut off, just like His covenant people were cut off, if they lapse into unbelief. Could it be any clearer?
If God loves us no matter what we do, then these passages are clearly in error or meaningless at best. If that is the case, how can we trust the Word of God to tell us the truth?
There must be an aspect of God’s love that depends on us keeping, abiding, and continuing in His love. It’s not automatic. We have to actively keep, abide, and continue in God’s love. If you tell me these passages don’t suggest that this part of God’s love is conditional, I will question your objectivity and your desire to know the truth.
Those who promote unconditional love often don’t truly believe in it. It just sounds appealing. Very few people, if any, genuinely believe that all love is unconditional. I certainly do not. Husbands, is your love for your wife unconditional? “Yes,” you say. But if she repeatedly commits adultery, will you genuinely stay married and love her unconditionally? Wives, what about you? How many times will you allow your husband to commit adultery before you kick him out? How often will you let him abuse you and your children before divorcing him? If your marital love is truly unconditional, then there’s no limit to the abuse you must endure. Isn’t that where this thinking about unconditional love can lead us? Clearly, every relationship has its red lines. At the same time, our love must be resilient enough to forgive minor mistakes that all of us make.
Jesus even acknowledged the conditional nature of the marriage contract when He said divorce is permitted in cases of immoral behavior in Matthew 19:9. God hates divorce, and it’s never His desire or preferred will. However, Jesus recognized that unfaithfulness is a legitimate reason to end a marriage. God divorced unfaithful Israel. Remember that divorce does not simply represent broken fellowship; it symbolizes a relationship that has come to an end.
Consider the parable of the prodigal son. His father said his wayward son was lost and dead. In love, the father waited patiently for his son to return home (repentance). When the son did come back, his father said, “My lost son is found, and my dead son is alive again.” The father’s love alone did not change the fact that his son was lost and dead. Only the son’s return home changed his destiny.
Is natural parental love a better analogy than marriage? I don’t think so. We are not God’s children by natural birth; we become His children through adoption. Using the language of Romans 11, we are grafted in (adopted) by our faith and stay grafted in (adopted) by our faith, “otherwise thou also shalt be cut off,” just like unbelieving Israel. Christians are just as “eternally secure” as Israel, most of whom were cut off because of their unbelief.
God’s salvific love is conditional, contrary to the position advanced by many believers.
As long as you believe some persons will go to hell, you must recognize the conditional aspect of God’s salvific love unless you embrace the heresy of universalism or state the absurd and incoherent notion that God loves those in hell unconditionally. If it is true that God loves those in hell unconditionally, then what is the value of His love for those who suffer eternal death and eternal torment? Is that not a mixed message that will most likely be misunderstood? Those who know God’s love of complacency will go to heaven. Hell is full of those who have known, but not acknowledged, God’s love of benevolence. This aspect of His love is unconditional. It should bring us to repentance and faith so that we can be saved and experience God’s complacent love or salvific love.
The issue I have with this constant unconditional love propaganda is that it is a blatant appeal to our emotions, not our reason, and not our intellect. If God really loves everyone unconditionally then how can He let anyone go to hell? How can we avoid falling into the trap of presuming on God’s grace if we truly believe His love for us is unconditional?
If God is going to take us to heaven, no matter how we live, then why bother with repentance from our sin? The idea that God is not concerned with our behavior is foreign to the Bible and a very significant error in the Christian church today. The apostle James tells us that “Faith without works is dead”.I add that faith without obedience to the will and law of God is dead. It will not save anyone. Read what Paul writes in the following passage.
“Know ye not that the unrighteous will not inherit the kingdom of God? Be not deceived: neither fornicators, nor idolaters, nor adulterers, nor effeminate, nor abusers of themselves with mankind (homosexuals), nor thieves, nor covetous, nor drunkards, nor revilers, nor extortioners, shall inherit the kingdom of God. And such were some of you: but ye were washed, but ye are sanctified, but ye are justified in the name of the Lord Jesus and by the Spirit of our God.” 1 Corinthians 6:9-10, emphasis added. Note the difference in present tense versus past tense. Paul says such “were” not “are” some of you. The grace of God continually cleanses us from the practice of sin. Read 1 John and the book of Titus.
Some think God is not concerned about our performance or our behavior. If that is true, then I am ignorant of the Word of God. Our behavior will either validate saving faith and genuine love for God or expose it for a fraudulent faith and a bogus love.
While it’s true that some aspects of God’s love are unconditional, it’s not true that everyone goes to heaven. Salvation is conditional, and so is God’s salvific or complacent love.
Addressing the unconditional aspect of God’s love is very important, but so is addressing the conditional element of His love. Only addressing the unconditional aspect of God’s love will leave hearers with a wrong impression. It will make them feel good, but leave them thinking that they can presume on the grace and love of God and live as they please. That is antinomian to the core.
I believe that reformation and revival are impossible as long as professing Christians, especially ministers, only talk about the unconditional love of God and fail to present the whole counsel of God. You see, “It’s often what they don’t say” that is as important, if not more important, than what they do say. God’s love pertaining to personal salvation is conditional. The two most important conditions are repentance from sin and faith in Jesus Christ. That message is critically important, but is often neglected.
[1] I have heard it taught that God’s love has two primary expressions: 1) the love of complacency, which is pleasure, satisfaction and gratification or possibly joy/delight, and, 2) the love of benevolence. God loves only the truly righteous with the love of complacency not the wicked. He loves both the wicked and the good with the love of benevolence.
[2] Jude tells us to guard against the evil of antinomianism, which is the turning of the grace of God into excuses to sin. How often does false teaching on the security of the “believer” turn the grace of God into licentiousness? It appears to be the unavoidable result in many, not all, cases.Is God’s Love Unconditional?
April, 2021
Have you ever noticed that what is “not said” is often just as important, if not more so, than what is said? Every day, we are bombarded with information from many sources. And every day, we receive selected news and information. Often, we aren’t allowed to choose what news interests us because someone else decides that for us. It takes discernment and discipline to think deeply about what we are told and what is left out. “It’s what they don’t say” that is usually more important than what they do say. Have you ever noticed that?
This clearly applies to major media outlets. Let me give just one example related to the media. A recent NYT article discussed the 11,000 annual deaths from gun violence, framing it as an epidemic that demands our immediate attention, while late-term abortions (with an annual death figure of 10,487) are described as “rare” and not worth discussing. That’s what the NYT didn’t say! They don’t mention the number of babies murdered in late-term abortions, nor do they explain the gun deaths. How many gun deaths were accidental? How many were in self-defense? And they say nothing about the number of crimes prevented because someone used a gun to stop violence or theft. How many lives are saved each year by guns used for protection? The newspaper clearly doesn’t want to provide that perspective. They want to brainwash the public. It’s often what they omit that matters more than what they include.
You will notice that my headline for this article asks the question about the nature of God’s love. The title suggests, as do most pastors, that there are two options regarding the love of God. It is either conditional or unconditional. That is another example, from the world of theology, of “what they don’t say” that is most important. Who says there are only two options?
Another secular specimen, where the headline itself is misleading, pertains to the discussion about evolution and the “fossil record”. Evolutionists love to talk about the “missing links” in evolution. Again, “it’s what they don’t say”, that is most important. Who says there are missing links in the fossil record? Evolutionists, who need transitional forms of life to be found to validate their theory, claim there are missing links. Understand my point? There are no missing links in the fossil “record”; there are just a bunch of fossils. And if the millions of fossils that we have found, evidence no intermediary fossils, then that is the “fossil record”, and nothing is missing. Is that not accurate?
But they want us to think something is missing, that will prove their theory of evolution. They brainwash us with the label of “missing links.” They want us to believe that if we continue to look for these missing links, we will find them someday. Trust them, missing links do exist. They just need a few hundred more years to find them! They haven’t been able to find them so far despite their many attempts. You see, they have a theory and just need to find the evidence to support the theory. In the meantime, just assume they are correct. I suggest that you don’t believe them. It’s impossible to find something that doesn’t exist, no matter how hard you look.
This fact also applies more broadly to every facet of life, including our spiritual lives. Have you ever left church, disappointed in what was not said, that should have been said? That has happened to me many times. It’s what the pastor didn’t say! That brings us to our topic about the love of God. Over the years, I have heard much about the unconditional love of God, but is that the whole story?
Preaching about God’s unconditional love is the easiest topic because it makes everyone feel good. It requires no courage or boldness to talk about God’s unconditional love. I am reminded of how many times the Apostle Paul emphasized being bold in sharing the gospel. Does it take boldness to tell everyone that God loves them no matter what they do and how they choose to live? I don’t think so. However, preaching the full truth about God’s love does require courage and boldness, as it may upset some people.
I would have no problem believing that almost all followers of Christ think that God’s love is entirely unconditional. It’s comforting to believe that no matter what we do, God will always love us and accept us just as we are. Francis Bacon was so right when he said, “Men prefer to believe what men prefer to be true”. Men believe what they want to be true, not what is true. I see this all the time with Christian’s that change the Word of God so that it agrees with what they want to be true. Not what is true, but what they want to be true. That is usually done to allow for some compromise in their life.
How often do parents assure their prodigal kids that they will always love them, no matter what they do? What do those parents really mean by that profession of unconditional love? At a minimum, it means they will always have feelings of affection for them. But does that profession of love actually make any difference in the eternal destiny of their prodigal children? Does the love of a Christian mother and father prevent their unrepentant prodigal from going to hell? It does not.
Does God truly promise us that He will always love us regardless of what we do or how we live? Will that unconditional love from God keep us out of hell if we don’t repent of our sins and believe the gospel? Many evangelical pastors will respond by saying that forsaking our sins is not a condition of salvation. But what if the salvific love of God is conditional?
The unconditional love of God is a foundation for the belief in eternal security, according to the advocates of that doctrine. Rejecting the belief in God’s unconditional love is the same thing as stating that the love of God is conditional, which is unthinkable to most, perhaps all, of its proponents. It is many of these very same folks, in the next breath, tell us that there is “one” condition to salvation, and that is our faith. This is an argument proposed by Charles Stanley in his book on Eternal Security. This is just one of many contradictions in his book.
As just mentioned, nearly all of these same Christians believe that there is at least one condition for salvation, which is our faith. However, for many, it is just a fleeting condition; one expression of faith forever guarantees the “believer” eternal salvation. It makes little difference how ungodly and unrepentant they remain. They are blind to the contradiction in claiming that God’s love is unconditional, yet asserting that faith is a requirement.
Since many of us “mere mortals” often love unconditionally, as we do with our prodigal children, that means we demonstrate pure love to a greater extent than God. That presumes God’s love is conditional, which Stanley says is unthinkable. How absurd to think that we might love in a way that makes God look lesser. God’s love is filled with wisdom and justice, not just feelings. Often, our love, especially parental love, is simply feelings and nothing more.
The question before us is, “Is God’s love unconditional?” I suspect most believers would answer that it is. God’s love is unconditional. I agree that one aspect or one dimension of God’s love is unconditional. However, if every aspect or every dimension of God’s love is unconditional, then how do we explain the following? Consider these questions.
Is God’s condemnation of Satan and other angels, when they sinned, an example of unconditional love?
Is God’s judgment of Adam and Eve an example of God’s unconditional love? God told them that the day they ate of the tree He commanded them not to eat from, that very day they would die. They didn’t die physically that day, but they did die that day. They were kicked out of the Garden of Eden. Is that an example of the unconditional love of God? If it is, then the phrase “unconditional love” has no meaning at all.
What about the destruction of the entire world, save Noah and his family? Is that too an example of the unconditional love of God?
What about the destruction of Sodom and Gomorrah? Did God love them unconditionally, while He destroyed the cities of the plains?
What about the destruction of Israel in 721 BC, 586 BC, and 70 AD? Are these also examples of God’s unconditional love? In each of these cases, God’s destruction of His people was horrific.
I believe the truth is that God’s love is both conditional and unconditional.[1] It is not “either or” but “both and”. To suggest that there are only two options is, in itself, misleading. It’s like saying there are missing links. Let me explain.
The word “love,” like most other words in the Bible, can have different meanings based on context and subject. Love is used in various ways in scripture. God’s love is complex. The love of God that makes the rain fall and the sun shine on both the wicked and the good, the just and the unjust, is unconditional. Some call it the love of benevolence. The love of God that gave us the atonement and drives God to seek the lost is also unconditional. The atonement is for everyone, with no exceptions. God desires everyone to be saved and to spend eternity with Him. Again, it is the love of benevolence and remains unconditional.
But the love of God that expresses itself in actual personal salvation is conditional. The love of God that makes salvation a reality in our lives is conditional and only bestowed on sinners who become truly righteous by grace through faith in Jesus Christ. That includes their repentance from sin. How do we know that is a correct interpretation? Let me offer a few passages of scripture for your consideration.
“He that hath my commandments, and keepeth them, he it is that loveth me; and he that loveth me shall be loved of my Father, and I will love him, and will manifest myself to him.” John 14:21
“If a man abide not in me, he is cast forth as a branch, and is withered: and men gather them, and cast them into the fire, and they are burned. If ye abide in me, and my words abide in you, ye shall ask what ye will, and it shall be done unto you. Herein is my Father glorified, that ye bear much fruit; so shall ye be my disciples. As the Father hath loved me, so have I loved you: continue ye in my love. If ye keep my commandments, ye shall abide in my love; even as I have kept my Father’s commandments, and abide in His love”. John 15:6-10 emphasis added.
We are told, “Keep yourselves in the love of God, looking for the mercy of our Lord Jesus Christ unto eternal life.” Jude 21 emphasis added.[2]
In the book of John, Jesus told us, “to continue in his love”. It’s not automatic. He also said that keeping his commandments is necessary “to abide in his love”. Again, it’s not automatic. There is a condition we must meet to continue in His love.
Jude tells us, “to keep ourselves in the love of God”.
Why is this “continuing, abiding, commandment keeping, and keeping ourselves in the love of God” necessary or even possible if God’s love is unconditional? If we remain in God’s love, whether or not we do these things, then these passages are meaningless. Is that not accurate? All of these statements are conditional in nature and critical in importance. This is what God expects and demands of us, who are the recipients of His love. In case you are not yet convinced, please consider the following additional verses.
“Then said God, Call his name Lo-ammi: for ye are not my people, and I will not be your God”. Hosea 1:9.
“All their wickedness is in Gilgal: for there I hated them: for the wickedness of their doings I will drive them out of mine house, I will love them no more: all their princes are revolters”. Hosea 9:15
“Thou shalt say then, the branches were broken off, that I might be grafted in. Well; because of unbelief they were broken off, and thou standest by faith. Be not high-minded, but fear: for if God spared not the natural branches, take heed lest he also spare not thee. Behold therefore the goodness and severity of God; but toward thee, goodness, if thou continue in his goodness: otherwise thou also shalt be cut off. And they also, if they abide not still in unbelief, shall be grafted in: For God is able to graft them in again.” Romans 11:19-23
In the Book of Hosea, the prophet was given a message from God to His people, the children of Israel. God’s patience had run out. The light of mercy was extinguished. God declared that Israel was no longer His people and He was no longer their God. Then God says, “I will love them no more.” I don’t know how it gets any clearer, God’s salvific love is conditional.
In the book of Romans, Paul talked about God’s rejection of His covenant people (Israel) because of their stubborn unbelief and God’s inclusion of the Gentiles because of their abiding faith. The promise remains that Israel can be grafted back in by faith. The threat remains that Gentiles will be cut off, just like His covenant people were cut off, if they lapse into unbelief. Could it be any clearer?
If God loves us no matter what we do, then these passages are clearly in error or meaningless at best. If that is the case, how can we trust the Word of God to tell us the truth?
There must be an aspect of God’s love that depends on us keeping, abiding, and continuing in His love. It’s not automatic. We have to actively keep, abide, and continue in God’s love. If you tell me these passages don’t suggest that this part of God’s love is conditional, I will question your objectivity and your desire to know the truth.
Those who promote unconditional love often don’t truly believe in it. It just sounds appealing. Very few people, if any, genuinely believe that all love is unconditional. I certainly do not. Husbands, is your love for your wife unconditional? “Yes,” you say. But if she repeatedly commits adultery, will you genuinely stay married and love her unconditionally? Wives, what about you? How many times will you allow your husband to commit adultery before you kick him out? How often will you let him abuse you and your children before divorcing him? If your marital love is truly unconditional, then there’s no limit to the abuse you must endure. Isn’t that where this thinking about unconditional love can lead us? Clearly, every relationship has its red lines. At the same time, our love must be resilient enough to forgive minor mistakes that all of us make.
Jesus even acknowledged the conditional nature of the marriage contract when He said divorce is permitted in cases of immoral behavior in Matthew 19:9. God hates divorce, and it’s never His desire or preferred will. However, Jesus recognized that unfaithfulness is a legitimate reason to end a marriage. God divorced unfaithful Israel. Remember that divorce does not simply represent broken fellowship; it symbolizes a relationship that has come to an end.
Consider the parable of the prodigal son. His father said his wayward son was lost and dead. In love, the father waited patiently for his son to return home (repentance). When the son did come back, his father said, “My lost son is found, and my dead son is alive again.” The father’s love alone did not change the fact that his son was lost and dead. Only the son’s return home changed his destiny.
Is natural parental love a better analogy than marriage? I don’t think so. We are not God’s children by natural birth; we become His children through adoption. Using the language of Romans 11, we are grafted in (adopted) by our faith and stay grafted in (adopted) by our faith, “otherwise thou also shalt be cut off,” just like unbelieving Israel. Christians are just as “eternally secure” as Israel, most of whom were cut off because of their unbelief.
God’s salvific love is conditional, contrary to the position advanced by many believers.
As long as you believe some persons will go to hell, you must recognize the conditional aspect of God’s salvific love unless you embrace the heresy of universalism or state the absurd and incoherent notion that God loves those in hell unconditionally. If it is true that God loves those in hell unconditionally, then what is the value of His love for those who suffer eternal death and eternal torment? Is that not a mixed message that will most likely be misunderstood? Those who know God’s love of complacency will go to heaven. Hell is full of those who have known, but not acknowledged, God’s love of benevolence. This aspect of His love is unconditional. It should bring us to repentance and faith so that we can be saved and experience God’s complacent love or salvific love.
The issue I have with this constant unconditional love propaganda is that it is a blatant appeal to our emotions, not our reason, and not our intellect. If God really loves everyone unconditionally then how can He let anyone go to hell? How can we avoid falling into the trap of presuming on God’s grace if we truly believe His love for us is unconditional?
If God is going to take us to heaven, no matter how we live, then why bother with repentance from our sin? The idea that God is not concerned with our behavior is foreign to the Bible and a very significant error in the Christian church today. The apostle James tells us that “Faith without works is dead”.I add that faith without obedience to the will and law of God is dead. It will not save anyone. Read what Paul writes in the following passage.
“Know ye not that the unrighteous will not inherit the kingdom of God? Be not deceived: neither fornicators, nor idolaters, nor adulterers, nor effeminate, nor abusers of themselves with mankind (homosexuals), nor thieves, nor covetous, nor drunkards, nor revilers, nor extortioners, shall inherit the kingdom of God. And such were some of you: but ye were washed, but ye are sanctified, but ye are justified in the name of the Lord Jesus and by the Spirit of our God.” 1 Corinthians 6:9-10, emphasis added. Note the difference in present tense versus past tense. Paul says such “were” not “are” some of you. The grace of God continually cleanses us from the practice of sin. Read 1 John and the book of Titus.
Some think God is not concerned about our performance or our behavior. If that is true, then I am ignorant of the Word of God. Our behavior will either validate saving faith and genuine love for God or expose it for a fraudulent faith and a bogus love.
While it’s true that some aspects of God’s love are unconditional, it’s not true that everyone goes to heaven. Salvation is conditional, and so is God’s salvific or complacent love.
Addressing the unconditional aspect of God’s love is very important, but so is addressing the conditional element of His love. Only addressing the unconditional aspect of God’s love will leave hearers with a wrong impression. It will make them feel good, but leave them thinking that they can presume on the grace and love of God and live as they please. That is antinomian to the core.
I believe that reformation and revival are impossible as long as professing Christians, especially ministers, only talk about the unconditional love of God and fail to present the whole counsel of God. You see, “It’s often what they don’t say” that is as important, if not more important, than what they do say. God’s love pertaining to personal salvation is conditional. The two most important conditions are repentance from sin and faith in Jesus Christ. That message is critically important, but is often neglected.
[1] I have heard it taught that God’s love has two primary expressions: 1) the love of complacency, which is pleasure, satisfaction and gratification or possibly joy/delight, and, 2) the love of benevolence. God loves only the truly righteous with the love of complacency not the wicked. He loves both the wicked and the good with the love of benevolence.
[2] Jude tells us to guard against the evil of antinomianism, which is the turning of the grace of God into excuses to sin. How often does false teaching on the security of the “believer” turn the grace of God into licentiousness? It appears to be the unavoidable result in many, not all, cases.
