Matthew 5:45
Matthew 5:43-48 (see also Matthew 18:14)
“You have heard that it was said, ‘You shall love your neighbor and hate your enemy.’ But I say to you, love your enemies and pray for those who persecute you, so that you may be sons of your Father who is in heaven; for He causes His sun to rise on the evil and the good, and sends rain on the righteous and the unrighteous. For if you love those who love you, what reward do you have? Do not even the tax collectors do the same? If you greet only your brothers, what more are you doing than others? Do not even the Gentiles do the same? Therefore you are to be perfect, as your heavenly Father is perfect.”
Omni-benevolence is the term that describes this passage, and this is indeed a very powerful passage because it gives a glimpse into the Father’s perspective. Yes, Calvinists agree that “God is loving to every man,” but only in terms of temporal and insignificant matters:
Calvinist, George Whitefield, explains: “And so it is, but not his saving mercy. God is loving to every man: he sends his rain upon the evil and upon the good.” (A Letter from George Whitefield to the Rev. Mr. John Wesley, emphasis mine)
What’s “rain” in comparison to Christ? Does the Father’s mutually agreed, universal loving will, not extend beyond the temporal?
Calvinist, George Whitefield, explains: “I believe the doctrine of reprobation, in this view, that God intends to give saving grace, through Jesus Christ, only to a certain number, and that the rest of mankind, after the fall of Adam, being justly left of God to continue in sin, will at last suffer that eternal death which is its proper wages.” (A Letter from George Whitefield to the Rev. Mr. John Wesley, emphasis mine)
Loving toward every man, but only in terms of the things that don’t add up to much? In what way would God love those whom He allegedly, foreordained to “pass by” and to be “justly left of God”?
One member of The Society of Evangelical Arminians comments: “For the Calvinist who wants to call God ‘loving’ to the reprobate for giving them temporal blessings’ but not eternal blessings, Jesus disagrees: ‘What good is it for a man to gain the whole world, yet forfeit his soul?’ (Mark 8:36)” (SEA)
One member of The Society of Evangelical Arminians explains: “You are seeing what happens when Calvinists define terms as they please. So, by definition, God is just and God is love, no matter how God’s actions appear to others. God consigns some to hell and others to glory; seems unjust and unloving to us but since God is loving and just by definition, things are not what they appear. It’s a mystery! God’s ways are not our ways! Whenever they get into a jam, it’s mystery all the way down. So, somehow you have to get to first things: how to define terms and what will count as evidence that one view is more likely than another. No biblical dictionary (any for that matter) will define love as [Calvinism] does. Jesus tells us to love our enemies, but it appears God does not have to. Are we to ‘love’ others as God seems to in the Calvinist scheme? Isn’t love more than causing it to rain on the just and unjust alike.” (SEA, emphasis mine)
Another member of The Society of Evangelical Arminians adds: “The odd thing I have seen done with the passage that says God sends His rain on the just and unjust, which clearly says that God loves His enemies, and calls us, therefore, to love our enemies in imitation of Him, is that some Calvinists try to limit God’s love to sending rain on the just and unjust. They emit an attitude of ‘yeah, God loves all people; He merely sends rain on them.’ Incredible, isn’t it? The passage gives that as an example of God’s love, not as a definition. It’s an example to us to treat our enemies kindly. And is it not a bizarre thought to think that God loves someone, so He will give them temporal blessings like rain, but has unconditionally decreed their everlasting misery. Are you kidding me? With love like that, who needs enemies? May we never grow callous to the shocking horror that Calvinist doctrine logically leads to. May we not lose our incredulity over Calvinism.” (SEA, emphasis mine)
I think that the Calvinists have gotten the impression that “rain” was the most that God loved mankind, instead of seeing it as an expression of just how much God loved mankind. Back then, rain meant survival. So we should take this passage to mean that God is deeply concerned for the welfare of everyone, not the least of which, would be their eternal welfare, which kindness is expressed through the greatest thing that He could ever give, namely, the gift of His Son, Jesus Christ. Otherwise, why would God be so concerned about their physical state, and not their eternal state?
