Expressions of Divine Duality: Exploring God's Love and Hate in Biblical Hebrew

In the complex tapestry of theological language, the divine attributes of love and hate invite deep, reflective inquiry. The apparent paradox between these two emotions in Scripture has long puzzled readers who, based on modern English usage, view “hate” as an unmitigated rejection or even malicious hostility. Yet, in the ancient context of biblical Hebrew, the word translated as “hate”—sane (שָׂנֵא)—carries a range of meanings that extend beyond our contemporary understandings. It is this nuance that compels scholars and believers alike to reconsider how divine passion is expressed in the sacred texts.

The Hebrew term sane is not a mirror image of the modern concept of hate. Rather than denoting unbridled animosity, sane has historically connoted a deliberate diminution of love—a “loving less”—that marks a moral and relational distancing. In poetic and covenantal contexts, this linguistic device is employed to illustrate a choice: to adhere to a divine standard or to turn away from it. For example, Psalm 5:5 proclaims, “You hate all who do wrong,” a declaration that, on close examination, should be understood as God’s intense rejection of unrighteousness rather than an impulsive personal vendetta. Even Jesus’ challenging words in Luke 14:26, which compare familial love with the totality of commitment required to follow Him, resonate with this nuanced usage. (2)

Ancient Israelite culture intertwined linguistic expression with broader social and covenantal responsibilities. Love and hate were not merely emotional states but were intimately connected to actions and allegiances. The language of Scripture reflects a community in which moral choices were visually and poetically delineated through contrasting expressions—drawing a vivid line between that which fosters divine communion and that which leads to spiritual estrangement. In this framework, sane becomes a marker of dedication: to “hate” in this sense is to shun the corrupting influence of sin, affirming one’s loyalty to a higher, sanctifying love.

This interplay between divine love and hate comes sharply into focus within the covenant relationship between God and His people. Throughout the Hebrew Bible, passages such as those in Malachi highlight a God who expresses deep affection for those who pursue righteousness while simultaneously rejecting what is contrary to His will. Here, the dynamic is not one of capricious emotional volatility but of a passionate commitment to moral and spiritual integrity. The language of sane thus functions as both a diagnostic and a directive—it reveals the heart’s disposition while guiding believers towards the kind of love that aligns with divine purpose. 1

Modern interpretations often risk oversimplifying this rich linguistic heritage by equating all instances of “hate” with a generic, modern hostility. Yet the ancient Hebrew perspective challenges us to distinguish between relational estrangement and the corrective, purifying force of divine judgment. God’s denunciation of sin through the language of sane is inseparable from His overarching love—it is an expression meant to awaken, reform, and ultimately restore. This understanding offers a counterpoint to contemporary narratives that depict God’s wrath as inherently punitive; instead, it invites us to see divine anger as a necessary and constructive element of His redemptive plan.

Ultimately, the narrative of divine love and judgment converges on a message of profound redemption. God loved us so deeply—even while we remained in a state of enmity with Him—that He sent His Son, Christ, to die for us in our sin. This act is the supreme demonstration of a love that does not abandon us in our brokenness. Instead, it is a love that transforms, raising us up to conform to His holy image and granting us spiritual life that reflects our true, intended identity. In His redemptive plan, the tension between love and hate is resolved: what may appear as divine “hate” is in fact a passionate commitment to eradicate sin and cultivate the fuller, more vibrant love that He envisions for humanity. (3)

It is in the depths of this divine drama that we find an invitation to explore further. How do these ancient linguistic nuances inform modern understandings of justice, holiness, and redemption? In reexamining God’s language, we may uncover broader implications for contemporary ethical discussions, the role of moral indignation in the public sphere, and the transformative power of unconditional love. Such reflections encourage not only scholarly debate but also personal growth as we seek to embody the love that overcomes enmity—a love that calls us to leave behind the paralysis of sin and become the living image of the Creator’s grace.