The God Who Loves He Will Do Whatever It Takes To Draw Us To Him

Rating:
Summary: If this is how God loves....
Review: then God is not omni benevolent. This book is nothing more than MacArthur's attempt to have his cake and eat it too. On the one hand he wants to uphold the traditional Reformed idea that God has an elected people that He loves with a special and unconditional love. Yet, on the other hand MacArthur wants to believe that God loves the non-elect as well. MacArthur argues for this by saying that God possesses two types of love: a general and non-saving love, which he gives to all, and a special and saving love He displays only towards the elect. In my opinion there seems to be a disturbing trend taking place in Reformed apologetics these days. Since they can't conform all of Scripture to their teachings, they invent new ideas and doctrines to attempt to compensate for those deficiencies and weaknesses. First, many have begun to argue for the concept that God has two wills, and that God's desire to save all men only pertains to God's first will, which is really not salvific at all. This has been in direct response to criticisms that have demonstrated that the usual Calvinist approach of saying all men means all types of men is not satisfactory and does not make sense of all the Scriptures.

Now MacArthur has added another element to the argument by saying that God has two types of love. Does anyone else see the pattern here? First God has two wills and now he commands two types of love as well. I can understand MacArthur's reasoning for writing this book since he desires to stem the tide of young and zealous Reformed initiates who argue that God does not love the reprobate, but in fact hates them. They argue for this from Scripture passages such as Romans 9:13, which they believe validates the idea that God hates the non-elect. Yet, instead of accepting the obvious MacArthur has chosen to develop his own unique and unhistorical idea. When the Scripture speaks of God's love for all mankind it always uses the Greek word agape and never gives any hint of a differentiation. In the gospel of Mark, Jesus loved the rich young ruler even though he didn't accept Christ's message. Are we honestly supposed to believe that the agape spoken of there is some ulterior form of love? I and many others do not believe that to be the case. Moreover, Jesus commands us to love our enemies and do well to those who hate and despise us. Is God calling us to do something that He Himself will not do? Again, I seriously doubt this is the case

Finally, I found many of MacArthur's arguments to be unconvincing. He says that he is willing to accept God's love for the non-elect as a love that is calling them to repentance, giving them sufficient grace, and showering them with earthly blessings, but his argument breaks down when one examines his beliefs. Since MarArthur holds to the traditional Reformed idea of Total Depravity, he believes men are corpses are sin, completely unresponsive, oblivious to the things of God, and unable to do a thing. Now, I wouldn't walk up to a corpse tell him I love him and plead with him to repent because that is just ludicrous. Therefore, I doubt the all-wise omnipotent ruler of the universe would do the same to men that are dead in sin since He is infinitely smarter than humans and knows this will accomplish nothing. MacArthur's view of total depravity completely undercuts his arguments for God's love. If you are really serious about studying and understanding God's love for all of us, then read the Bible and only pick up this book after previous study.