Home » Posts tagged 'love'

Tag Archives: love

Is Love a Feeling? The Holy Bible on the Nature of Love

Is love a feeling?

What do you think?

__ Yes, love is a feeling.

__ No, love is not a feeling.

The Correct Answer Is …

“Yes”!

The correct answer is “yes” to both the question “Is love a feeling?” and the question “Is love not a feeling?”  Love involves the feelings and affections, so in that sense love is a feeling.  However, love is not merely a feeling, but it involves the will and the actions.

Love Involves Self-Sacrificial and Willful Action

Many in the world assume that love is just a sappy sentimental feeling, or that love is a teenage boy having his heart flutter when a pretty girl looks at him.  This is a very Biblically insufficient definition of love.  How does God love?

John 3:16 For God so loved the world, that he gave his only begotten Son, that whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but have everlasting life.

God’s love does not just involve sappy sentimentalism.  The Father’s love led Him to give to rebellious sinners what was most valuable to Him–His own Son. His love involved self-sacrificial action.  Believers must show this same kind of self-sacrificial, acting, willing, giving love:

John 15:13 Greater love hath no man than this, that a man lay down his life for his friends.

This sort of love is required in other relationships as well:

Eph. 5:25 Husbands, love your wives, even as Christ also loved the church, and gave himself for it;

Clearly, love is not just an emotional high, but it involves self-sacrifice, action, giving oneself to the loved one at tremendous cost.

Love Also Includes the Feelings or Affections

At the same time, love is not the self-sacrifice of a drone or robot that follows a computer program to blow itself up and save someone else.  Love includes the feelings and affections.  We do not love as robots, but as people who have affections and passions. God wants us to love Him with all that we are–that includes our minds and wills, but it also includes our affections or feelings.

God’s love for His people involves His affections in whatever sense He has passions or affections:

Hos. 11:8 How shall I give thee up, Ephraim? how shall I deliver thee, Israel? how shall I make thee as Admah? how shall I set thee as Zeboim? mine heart is turned within me, my repentings are kindled together.
Hos. 11:9 I will not execute the fierceness of mine anger, I will not return to destroy Ephraim: for I am God, and not man; the Holy One in the midst of thee: and I will not enter into the city.

Zeph. 3:17 The LORD thy God in the midst of thee is mighty; he will save, he will rejoice over thee with joy; he will rest in his love, he will joy over thee with singing.

Human love between spouses involves the affections or passions.  In the Song of Solomon the husband and wife–who are to be patterns for marital relationships–are madly in love with each other and passions and affections are coming out all over the place.

Our love for what is of God also involves our passions or affections. Paul said: “I delight in the law of God after the inward man” (Romans 7:22).  “Delight” is a feeling or affection. The Messiah said, as a pattern for all the godly:  “I delight to do thy will, O my God: yea, thy law is within my heart” (Psalm 40:8).

We could multiple examples for all other sorts of love that are dealt with in Scripture.

So is love a feeling?  Yes, it is–God did not make us robots.  Is love merely a feeling, or only a feeling, or primarily a feeling? No–it is much more than that, but it involves self-sacrificial action.

So in all your relationships–most importantly with God and secondarily with others–love like God does.  Give yourself self-sacrificially to the Lord and to others.  That is the most important thing–but don’t be a robot either.  God wants you to love with all that you are, and that includes your feelings or affections.

TDR

God Does NOT Love Everyone? An Error of Hyper-Calvinism, part 3 of 3

Is it true that God does NOT love everyone? Hyper-Calvinism says “yes,” but Scripture says “no!” In part 1 and part 2 of this series, I summarized the first portions of my study God Does Not Love Everyone: A Hyper-Calvinist Error.  This final part will summarize the final portion of God Does Not Love Everyone: A Hyper-Calvinist Error, to which readers are encouraged to refer for more information.

Hyper-Calvinism Employs Exegetical and Logical Fallacies

When Arguing God Does Not Love the Non-Elect:

Texts on God’s Hatred

Hyper-Calvinism may contend that some passages of Scripture prove that God does not love the non-elect.  For example, the Bible states:

As it is written, Jacob have I loved, but Esau have I hated. (Romans 9:13)

The foolish shall not stand in thy sight: thou hatest all workers of iniquity. (Psalm 5:5)

5 The LORD trieth the righteous: but the wicked and him that loveth violence his soul hateth. 6 Upon the wicked he shall rain snares, fire and brimstone, and an horrible tempest: this shall be the portion of their cup. 7 For the righteous LORD loveth righteousness; his countenance doth behold the upright.” (Psalm 11:5-7)

These passages clearly teach that God hates the wicked. But they do not say that God does NOT love them at the same time.  Jehovah is perfectly capable of having love in one sense for a wicked person while hating him in a different sense. Indeed, Psalm 5:5 states that God hates “all” workers of iniquity, so even the elect, before they believe, are hated by God in one sense while being eternally loved by Him in a different sense. If God can love and hate the elect at the same time in different senses, He is perfectly capable of doing the same for the non-elect.

Furthermore, Romans 9:13 is not even about the individuals Jacob and Esau. Paul quotes Malachi 1:2-3, which speaks of God’s special blessings on the nation of Israel, blessings withheld from the nation of Edom.  Consider Malachi 1:1-5:

1 The burden of the word of the LORD to Israel by Malachi. 2 I have loved you, saith the LORD. Yet ye say, Wherein hast thou loved us? Was not Esau Jacob’s brother? saith the LORD: yet I loved Jacob, 3 And I hated Esau, and laid his mountains and his heritage waste for the dragons of the wilderness. 4 Whereas Edom saith, We are impoverished, but we will return and build the desolate places; thus saith the LORD of hosts, They shall build, but I will throw down; and they shall call them, The border of wickedness, and, The people against whom the LORD hath indignation for ever. 5 And your eyes shall see, and ye shall say, The LORD will be magnified from the border of Israel. (Malachi 1:1-5)

Romans 9:13 never denies that God loved Esau—God is able to love sinners in one sense while hating them in another.  More fundamentally, Romans 9:13 is not even about the individual people Jacob and Esau at all, except insofar as they are the progenitors of the nations of Israel and Edom.

These passages of Scripture are simply taken out of context by hyper-Calvinism.

Hyper-Calvinism Employs Exegetical and Logical Fallacies

When Arguing God Does Not Love the Non-Elect:

Texts on God’s Special Love

Advocates of hyper-Calvinism can also argue that Scripture speaks of God’s love in passages that limit His love to the elect. There are indeed passages of Scripture that show that Jehovah has a special love for His believing people. However, this no more denies that God loves the non-elect than does the fact that a Christian husband has a special love for his wife proves that the husband hates everyone else. Hyper-Calvinism needs texts of Scripture that affirm that God does not love some people, not passages that say God does love some people.  There simply are no such texts in God’s Word.

Hyper-Calvinism Makes Further Exegetical

and Historical Fallacies

Hyper-Calvinism also makes other fallacious exegetical arguments. Indeed, hyper-Calvinism does not even accurately represent the teaching of John Calvin. Calvin, speaking about the rich young ruler in Mark 10:21, wrote: “Jesus beholding him, loved him [Mark 10:21]. … [A]ll the creatures of God, without exception, are the objects of his love. … God is sometimes said to love those whom he does not approve or justify … Christ … love[d] a man [like the rich young ruler] who was proud and a hypocrite, while nothing is more hateful to God than these two vices[.] (John Calvin and William Pringle, Commentary on a Harmony of the Evangelists Matthew, Mark, and Luke, vol. 2 [Bellingham, WA: Logos Bible Software, 2010], 398–399.)

Thus, the teaching of hyper-Calvinism that God does not love every individual grossly misinterprets Scripture while also misinterpreting history. Even John Calvin did not teach the hyper-Calvinist notion that God loves only the elect. Since neither the Bible, nor even John Calvin, taught this false idea, you should not teach or believe it either. Reject such a slander on the character of God and recognize that “God so loved the world, that he gave his only begotten Son, that whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but have everlasting life” (John 3:16). Please read God Does Not Love Everyone: A Hyper-Calvinist Error for more information.

TDR

God does NOT love everyone? A Hyper-Calvinist Error, part 2 of 3

Is it true that God does NOT love everyone? Hyper-Calvinism says “yes!” Scripture says “no!”  In part 1 of 3 in this series, I summarized the first portion of my recent composition God Does Not Love Everyone: A Hyper-Calvinist Error. John 3:16, Mark 10:21, and 1 John 2:2 refute the hyper-Calvinist idea that God loves only the elect. Scripture is plain that God loves the entire world-every single person.

 

If Hyper-Calvinists Were Right,

Then Christians Should Not Love Their Enemies

 

Christians should be like God. If God loves every person, then they should love all men.  If God has nothing but an everlasting hatred for the non-elect, then they should strive with all their might to purge out any love that they have for lost sinners from their bosoms and have nothing but an eternal and everlasting hatred for them, (allegedly) like God.  However, the Lord Jesus taught:

 

43 Ye have heard that it hath been said, Thou shalt love thy neighbour, and hate thine enemy. 44 But I say unto you, Love your enemies, bless them that curse you, do good to them that hate you, and pray for them which despitefully use you, and persecute you; 45 That ye may be the children of your Father which is in heaven: for he maketh his sun to rise on the evil and on the good, and sendeth rain on the just and on the unjust. 46 For if ye love them which love you, what reward have ye? do not even the publicans the same? 47 And if ye salute your brethren only, what do ye more than others? do not even the publicans so? 48 Be ye therefore perfect, even as your Father which is in heaven is perfect. (Matthew 5:43-48)

 

Christians must love their enemies because God loves His enemies.  When they love their wicked, unregenerate, Christ-and-Christian hating enemies, they are being like their Father in heaven. The Sermon on the Mount does not say, “Love your elect enemies and bless the elect when they curse and hate you. If the non-elect do it, though, show eternal hatred to them.” Believers must “increase and abound in love one toward another, and toward all men” (1 Thessalonians 3:12-13) because God loves all men, not the elect alone.

 

The Quran Agrees with Hyper-Calvinism,

but the Bible does Not

 

Hyper-Calvinists need specific passages that teach God does NOT love the majority of the world that rejects Christ and is eternally lost. It would not have been hard for God to include such statements in the Bible. After all, the Quran is filled with them. For example:

 

 

Q 2:276 Allah hath blighted usury and made almsgiving fruitful. Allah loveth not the impious and guilty.

Q 3:32 Say: Obey Allah and the messenger. But if they turn away, lo! Allah loveth not the disbelievers (in His guidance).

Q 3:57 And as for those who believe and do good works, He will pay them their wages in full. Allah loveth not wrong-doers.

 

The Quran is full of such statements-when I went through the Quran from cover to cover as part of my preparation for my debate with the Muslim apologist Shabir Ally I found the seemingly constant drum-beat of Allah’s lack of love for this group and that group a sharp contrast with the teaching of God’s Word, the Bible.

 

While the idea that God does not love unbelievers is all over the Quran, the number of statements in holy Scripture such as “God does not love person X” or “God does not love people like Y” are equal in number to the statements such as “Christ did not die for person X” or “Christ did not die for group Y”–namely, zero.  Both limited atonement and the hyper-Calvinist doctrine of God’s lack of love for the vast majority of mankind are completely absent from Scripture.

 

Please read God Does Not Love Everyone: A Hyper-Calvinist Error for more information.

TDR

God does NOT love everyone? A Hyper-Calvinist Error, part 1 of 3

Is it true that God does NOT love everyone?  That is the teaching of hyper-Calvinism.  I recently put together a study entitled God Does Not Love Everyone: A Hyper-Calvinist Error where I examine that question.  I will be summarizing the argument from that larger study in three blog posts. Please read the larger work using the link above for more information.

 

God Loves The Entire World,

So the Idea that God Does Not Love the Non-Elect is False

 

John 3:16 reads: “For God so loved the world, that he gave his only begotten Son, that whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but have everlasting life.”  This passage plainly teaches that God loves everyone in the world, and the word “world” does not mean “the world of the elect” as hyper-Calvinists and many Calvinists allege. None of the 187 uses of the Greek word kosmos (“world”) in the New Testament use the word “world” of the “world of the elect.”  This Calvinist idea is simply reading into Scripture what it does not say.  1 John 2:2 specifically distinguishes between the elect and the world while positing that Christ died for not the elect alone, but also for the whole world:

 

And he is the propitiation for our sins: and not for ours only, but also for the sins of the whole world.

 

John 3:16 is conclusive proof that God loves the entire world—including those who never believe and consequently perish in their sins.

 

Jesus Christ Loved Individual Non-Elect

And Eternally Lost Sinners: God Does Not Love Only the Elect

The Lord Jesus’ love for the unconverted rich young ruler proves that God’s love is not limited to the elect alone:

 

17 And when he was gone forth into the way, there came one running, and kneeled to him, and asked him, Good Master, what shall I do that I may inherit eternal life? 18 And Jesus said unto him, Why callest thou me good? there is none good but one, that is, God. 19 Thou knowest the commandments, Do not commit adultery, Do not kill, Do not steal, Do not bear false witness, Defraud not, Honour thy father and mother. 20 And he answered and said unto him, Master, all these have I observed from my youth. 21 Then Jesus beholding him loved him, and said unto him, One thing thou lackest: go thy way, sell whatsoever thou hast, and give to the poor, and thou shalt have treasure in heaven: and come, take up the cross, and follow me. 22 And he was sad at that saying, and went away grieved: for he had great possessions. 23 And Jesus looked round about, and saith unto his disciples, How hardly shall they that have riches enter into the kingdom of God! 24 And the disciples were astonished at his words. But Jesus answereth again, and saith unto them, Children, how hard is it for them that trust in riches to enter into the kingdom of God! 25 It is easier for a camel to go through the eye of a needle, than for a rich man to enter into the kingdom of God. 26 And they were astonished out of measure, saying among themselves, Who then can be saved? 27 And Jesus looking upon them saith, With men it is impossible, but not with God: for with God all things are possible. (Mark 10:17-27)

 

The Son of God loved this unconverted hypocrite whom Scripture presents as a paradigm of large groups of lost men who trust in their riches. The Lord Jesus Christ clearly does not love the elect alone.  His love for the rich young ruler is an instance of the eternal love manifested by the Father, Son, and Spirit towards the fallen and lost world spoken of in John 3:16.

 

Please read God Does Not Love Everyone: A Hyper-Calvinist Error to learn more. The What is Truth? blog also has a variety of articles on Calvinism.

 

TDR

Could There Be Practical Reasons Why Some Evangelists See More or Better Results than Others?

When I say, “evangelist,” for purposes of this discussion, I mean men preaching the gospel, perhaps in missionary status but also men preaching in their own churches.  Over my thirty plus years in full time preaching, I have won many to Christ, saw them baptized into the church, and then discipled.  I did this without a smidgin of pragmatism or gimmicks.  It was pure preaching, dependence on the gospel.

On the other hand, I saw men who rarely saw results.  They still do not see very many results.  They go years, even decades without discipling one person.  Some see many.  Some see very few to none.  Could there be practical reasons why this occurs?  I believe so.  I want to enumerate reasons not necessarily in order.

         1.   A Difference in Love

Some men are faithful to do evangelism.  They do it all the time.  These men have knocked on many doors.  They do what God wants in that way.  In one sense, you could say that they are loving God in that they are keeping His commandments on evangelism.

At the end of Jude, Jude talks about having compassion, making a difference.  Jesus very often in the gospels is said to looking at the people with compassion, connecting His success to that attribute.  Paul mentioned how much he cared again and again.

I’ve noticed that men treat people like they are objects of their preaching.  They very often go about the task like they are putting in the time, and the sheer time-spent counts as loving faithfulness.

It’s important to be faithful.  It is very good to persevere.  I’m thankful for those who will do this.  However, you’ve got to love the people for whom you are reaching.  This includes wanting them to be saved, not just limiting yourself to accomplishing the task.  People know when you care about them.  They can tell when you are going through the motions with them.

Some love people enough that they take record of those with whom they’ve talked.  They remember their names.  These unique individuals will pray for those they evangelize.  They go back and visit them.

Have you ever had someone talk to you, and it seemed like it was an exercise in hearing their own voice?  I know a few pastors this way.  You exist for them to preach to.  You’re there for them to supply their pearls of wisdom.  When you talk to them, you’re not sure if they are listening.  When they talk, it is not personable.  It sounds like a speech written off of a script.  They don’t make a connection in a relationship because they don’t show that they care.

Compassion makes a difference in the results of evangelism.  I know some reading here think they love people.  They’ve convinced themselves.  They rarely see anyone come to Christ, baptized, join the church, and made disciples.  Perhaps you should consider that you don’t care enough.  That’s the reason why.

Both of the churches I started, what I’m writing made a huge difference.  Those people knew that I loved them.  They still do.  Some missionaries act in many ways as pure place setters because they lack the love they need to see more occur than they already do.

      2.   A Difference in Spirit-Filled Boldness

Many men are easily turned away.  A person shows resistance and they move on.  This is related to number one.  They can’t get through those situations because maybe they don’t care enough.  They don’t love enough.  They give up on the person very quickly.

Sometimes men will dance around what needs to be said.  They don’t get to the crucial point toward salvation, the particular stronghold, because they don’t want to say it.  They are either too fearful or they don’t want to look bad.  Both of those are similar but slightly different.

The Apostle Paul in Ephesians 6 and Colossians 4 asks the churches to pray for his boldness.  That is an important evangelism prayer.  When the Holy Spirit fills someone, Acts 4 says that they preach the Word of God with boldness.  This is a significant manifestation of Holy Spirit filling.

Having or not having boldness might mean speaking or not speaking.  Some don’t get to the evangelism because they don’t have boldness.  They don’t have boldness because they are not filled with the Spirit, that is, controlled with the Spirit.  They also might not be praying for boldness.  Boldness relates to results someone will see.

Many, many times I have gone out with someone else evangelizing.  He talks and he’s done with a person.  He doesn’t get to the gospel.  I pick up the conversation where he left off and I get through the whole gospel and with great conviction on the person.  Boldness is the difference in these situations.

When I write this, I’m as far away as 1-2-3 pray-with-me as a person can get.  This is not manipulation.  I’m writing about practical, biblical differences that result in someone seeing more or less results.  I’m not guaranteeing results, but there are scriptural reasons some will see more than others, even why someone will never see any results and he should check his heart because of it.

Obviously the two, love and boldness, relate with one another.  Love is fruit of the Spirit.  When the Holy Spirit fills someone, he speaks with boldness.  When I preach boldly, the Spirit bears witness with my spirit that I am a child of God.

To Be Continued

Jesus Made the Cross a Symbol and Paul Took It Further

The word “cross” is found in the New Testament 28 times.  The mere expression “cross” doesn’t mean anything without some explanation.  Jesus started us off by using it in Matthew 10:28:

And he that taketh not his cross, and followeth after me, is not worthy of me.

Obviously Jesus had not died on the cross yet, so He was prophesying His own death.  He knew He was going to die on the cross.  He was already making a symbol of Christianity before He died on it.
After Jesus died on a literal, physical cross, crafted by the Romans for execution, the Apostle Paul took up the symbolism and took it further than Jesus did.  Paul does that in these references.  I copy them here for your reading and consideration.
*1 Corinthians 1:17-18:  17 For Christ sent me not to baptize, but to preach the gospel:: not with wisdom of words, lest the cross of Christ should be made of none effect. 18 For the preaching of the cross is to them that perish foolishness; but unto us which are saved it is the power of God.
*Galatians 5:11: And I, brethren, if I yet preach circumcision, why do I yet suffer persecution? then is the offence of the cross ceased.
*Galatians 6:12-14: 12 As many as desire to make a fair shew in the flesh, they constrain you to be circumcised; only lest they should suffer persecution for the cross of Christ. 13 For neither they themselves who are circumcised keep the law; but desire to have you circumcised, that they may glory in your flesh. 14 But God forbid that I should glory, save in the cross of our Lord Jesus Christ, by whom the world is crucified unto me, and I unto the world.
*Ephesians 2:16: And that he might reconcile both unto God in one body by the cross, having slain the enmity thereby:
*Philippians 3:18: (For many walk, of whom I have told you often, and now tell you even weeping, that they are the enemies of the cross of Christ:
Colossians 1:20:  And, having made peace through the blood of his cross, by him to reconcile all things unto himself; by him, I say, whether they be things in earth, or things in heaven.
Colossians 2:14: Blotting out the handwriting of ordinances that was against us, which was contrary to us, and took it out of the way, nailing it to his cross;
I don’t think Paul is using “cross” as a symbol in every one of these instances.  I think he is in all the references before which I placed an asterisk.  Maybe he is in the other references.  In those, I believe, he is referring to Christ’s literal death on the cross.  There is some symbolism, because cross itself became shorthand for Jesus’ real sacrificial, substitutionary death.
Someone could go further with Paul’s symbolism if he also listed the times Paul uses the term, “crucified.”  He uses that word 7 more times in the way I have been describing.  Based on the cross, crucified becomes an important theological word.  Here are those verses as used by Paul.
Romans 6:6: Knowing this, that our old man is crucified with him, that the body of sin might be destroyed, that henceforth we should not serve sin.
1 Corinthians 1:23: But we preach Christ crucified, unto the Jews a stumblingblock, and unto the Greeks foolishness;
1 Corinthians 2:2:  For I determined not to know any thing among you, save Jesus Christ, and him crucified.
Galatians 2:20:  I am crucified with Christ: nevertheless I live; yet not I, but Christ liveth in me: and the life which I now live in the flesh I live by the faith of the Son of God, who loved me, and gave himself for me.
Galatians 3:1:  O foolish Galatians, who hath bewitched you, that ye should not obey the truth, before whose eyes Jesus Christ hath been evidently set forth, crucified among you?
Galatians 5:24:  And they that are Christ’s have crucified the flesh with the affections and lusts.
Galatians 6:14:  But God forbid that I should glory, save in the cross of our Lord Jesus Christ, by whom the world is crucified unto me, and I unto the world.
In every case, the words cross and crucified are used as symbols of sacrifice.  First, Christ was sacrificed for us.  Salvation is not by works, not by human effort, but by the finished work of Christ on the cross.  The cross represents the finished work of Christ, the penalty of sin paid.  That’s why the cross is prominent in Galatians.  The cross work saves us, not circumcision or any other human work.
Second, the believer is sacrificed for Christ.  When someone comes to the cross for salvation, he comes to the sacrifice of Christ, but he comes with a sacrifice of himself.  He is crucified with Christ.  He is crucified to his life, his affections and lusts, and the world.  This is his denying his self and taking up his cross, like Jesus said.
Some people say there are two crosses.  That’s false.  There is one cross.  There, because of what Christ did, by faith we can do what we do, that is, lose our life for His sake.  This doesn’t occur at some later date.  This occurs when we are saved or justified by faith.
The cross is the symbol of Christianity and it represents those two sacrifices.

The Love of an Unsaved or Unconverted Person: What Is It?

Going door-to-door this last week — I’ve started that in earnest again with the change in weather — I went to a door that was wide open at an upstairs apartment.  I could see the two twenty-something men, who were inside, and as I started to talk to them, one of them said, “No thank you, we’re not a religious family.”  He also gave the obvious body language that the conversation was over.  I offered a gospel tract and he said, “No.”  I then knocked on the next door, then after that the two bottom doors in a fourplex.

As I stood waiting for people at the other three doors in that fourplex, I could hear these two men talking to one another, and as I walked to the next set of apartments, they both told each other they loved each other.  I thought about the concept of “love” in the world and how people use that term in a normal way.  Many homes where I live have the leftist value sign that says, “Love is love, and kindness is everything.”  It crossed my mind at this point to write about the love of an unsaved or unconverted person, and the eagerness to use the term in our culture.

As I finally sat down to write today, I checked the few online sites I visit, and at one there was a link to article online at the Christian Post, “Former Desiring God writer Paul Maxwell announces he’s no longer Christian.”  This is happening a lot now, even as Gallup recently mentioned that for the first time, less than 50% (47%) of Americans are members of a church of whatever kind.  A few paragraphs in the article about Maxwell read:

“What I really miss is connection with people,” Maxwell said on his Instagram feed. “What I’ve discovered is that I’m ready to connect again. And I’m kind of ready not to be angry anymore. I love you guys, and I love all the friendships and support I’ve built here. And I think it’s important to say that I’m just not a Christian anymore, and it feels really good. I’m really happy.”

“I can’t wait to discover what kind of connection I can have with all of you beautiful people as I try to figure out what’s next,” he added. “I love you guys. I’m in a really good spot. Probably the best spot of my life. I’m so full of joy for the first time. I love my life.” . . . . “I just say, ‘I know that you love me.’ I know, and I receive it as love. I know you care about the eternal state of my soul and you pushed through the social awkwardness of telling me this because you don’t want me to suffer. And that is a good thing. That’s a loving thing to do. And I hear where you’re coming from, and I respect your perspective.”

He renounces Christianity, but he says, “I love you guys, and I love all the friendships and support I’ve built here. . . . I love you guys (again).”  He refers to what his former colleagues have done in the way of preaching to him as their loving him.  He also says that he is “so full of joy for the first time.”   According to him, he also has “joy” as a consequence of ejecting from Christianity.

Reading this article dovetailed with my thoughts at that door last week, when I heard the two men express “love” to each other.  My thought is, what do they think love is?  I know what love is.  It is of God.  It is fruit of the Spirit.  Love is a biblical concept, that originates from scripture.  It entered the English language from the Bible.  What comes to my mind related to these thoughts is 1 John 4:7 and 16:

[E]very one that loveth is born of God, and knoweth God. . . . God is love; and he that dwelleth in love dwelleth in God, and God in him.

Scripture teaches that an unbeliever or an unconverted person cannot love.  Love is of God.  If he is not dwelling in God and God in him, he can’t love.  To love, someone must be born of God and know God.  Even if those two men and Maxwell are all using the term, just like most people in the world use the term, it doesn’t mean that they love.  They don’t.  They can’t.  It really is the same thing with joy.  Maxwell says he has joy now that he never had before, since he gave up Christianity.  I can interpret him as feeling perhaps less vexed now, because he’s living how he wants without the restraints of Christianity.  This is the pleasure of sin, not joy.

I don’t like hearing the word “love” outside of its actual meaning and the original context of its definition.  My dislike isn’t going to stop people from using it in a false way.  However, I think it needs to be pointed out.  If these people are going to reject Christianity or renounce it, they don’t get to hijack it or borrow from it, as they do with love.  They are not of God and they do not love.  The practice some kind of transactional relationship, where they express feelings they call love, but it isn’t love.  Love stays with the Bible and with Christianity and not with them, even if they claim otherwise.

If what unbelievers have and use isn’t love, then what is it?  Love isn’t a feeling or an emotion.  I’m not saying it is bereft or disengaged from emotion.  True love is not an emotion, but it is emotional.  It isn’t first emotional, but the emotions will come, just like repentance brings with it sorrow.  Emotion is a necessary component of biblical love, but it isn’t an emotion.

Unbelievers are using the term love in a naturalistic way, when it is a supernaturalistic term or concept.  Very often what they call love is really lust or just an expression of human care.  It’s like a greeting, have a good day!  It means I’ve got some kind of commitment to you.  It isn’t love, but it is sharing a human camaraderie.  It can’t be love though, because it isn’t going to provide or supply the greatest or the most essential needs the person has.  It’s to say that I will provide you some well being as we both head towards a temporal life of pleasure that will end in eternal torment.  The highest value will be human.  It won’t be divine, so it will be vain or superficial.

This “love,” that isn’t love, is what men think they want.  It is Esau trading his birthright for a mess of pottage.  It sacrifices the permanent on the altar of the immediate.  It anesthetizes someone against the vexation of the harmful effects of the curse, helping deaden the pain of the rejection of God.

A Love-O-Meter: Love Does Not Rejoice In Iniquity And Does Rejoice In the Truth

In a very important passage, in 1 Corinthians 13 the Apostle Paul shines love through a prism that refracts into fifteen different colors or hues.  Two of them are in verse 6, which reads:

[Love] rejoiceth not in iniquity, but rejoiceth in the truth.

As I’ve written many times, love is one of the most perverted concepts in this culture.  Part of critical theory is that words are power, so changing the definition of words is powerful.  Someone who does not want to love can redefine the word so that he is loving.  He can change the meaning of love so that he is loving when he’s actually hateful.  The people who are loving are now hateful.  This is where we stand today.
The two great commandments according to Jesus are (1) love God and (2) love your neighbor.  If love isn’t love, then those two commandments aren’t being obeyed. The New Testament spends pages clarifying love, and the Apostle Paul gives a very through description in 1 Corinthians 13.
In 1 Corinthians 13:6, Paul says in essence, “If it is love, it will not rejoice in iniquity, but it will rejoice in the truth.”  Contrariwise, “it can’t be love if it does rejoice in iniquity, but it does not rejoice in the truth.”  This is a simple love-o-meter that will eliminate most of what is called love.  I would estimate about 90% of so-called love is invalidated by these two simple statements.
Someone can call “up,” “down,” on his social media and get agreement that up is actually down in every comment in support of this concept, and it does not change the meaning of “up.”  “Up” is still never “down,” even if everyone agrees that it is.
As a thought experiment, let’s say that a man contended on the internet, and it even went viral with support, that up was really down.  A few people dared to disagree by saying that up was up and down was down.  The man then did six things in response.  First, he deleted and blocked anyone who said that up was up.  Second, he ghosted those who said that up was up and encouraged others do so.  Third, he encouraged employers to fire those who said up was up, to cancel any engagement with anyone who said that up was up.  Fourth, he called all those who proclaimed up to be up very broken people, toxic personalities, with narcissistic personality disorder.  Fifth, he published an instagram photo on behalf of up is actually down and asked for shows of continuous public support for up being down.  Sixth, he issued a restraining order against anyone who says that up is still up and not down.  He requires boundaries, and hearing that up is up triggers him, bringing psychological damages; hence, he must threaten a restraining order.  He must do this to promote wellness and self-care.
You may remember that the leftist values yard sign says, “Love is love.”  The term love becomes a vessel to pour whatever meaning someone wants it to mean.  “Love is love” serves to justify two men “loving” each other in a homosexual relationship.  Along with this, saying homosexuality isn’t love, is deemed “hate speech.”
Paul says that love “rejoiceth not in iniquity.”  “Iniquity” is a word that means “unrighteousness.”  It is the word for “righteousness” with a “not” at the front of it, a compound Greek word.  If something isn’t right, it can’t be love.  Someone doesn’t love someone by lying to him.  He doesn’t love someone by fornicating with that person.   Anything that disobeys scripture, either through omission or commission, isn’t love.
The verse doesn’t say, “love is not iniquity,” but that love doesn’t rejoice in iniquity.  That’s even stronger.  People supportive of sinful behavior are not loving someone.  People that want support of their sin are not asking for love, because love doesn’t support sinning.  When a young person wants support despite his sin, he is not asking for freedom, because freedom according to Jesus is freedom from sin (John 8:32-36).  Sin is bondage.  Love opposes the bondage of sin, hates it, hates what it does to the person.
Jesus says Satan is liar (John 8:44), and He is referring to the lie in the Garden to Eve and Adam.  Satan tells especially young people that standards and requirements and rules are bondage.  He says, sin is freedom.  The loving person, Satan says, gives you freedom, which means, “lets you sin.”  He says that the person trying to stop you from sin is bringing bondage and that you need boundaries between you and that person.  One of the boundaries you have already applied means you probably won’t even read this, because some good pyschobabble is available instead.
Love does not rejoice at all in any manifestation of what is not right, the word “iniquity” meaning “not right.”  Love does not rejoice in dress that is not right, music that is not right, language that is not right, entertainment that is not right, art that is not right, and associations that are not right.  Whenever someone does rejoice in things that are not right, that is not love.  The people who do rejoice in those things that are not right is not loving, but hating.  This is in the realm of up is up and down is down.
On the other hand, love does rejoice in the truth.  The truth is placed in contrast to iniquity.  Iniquity veers off of the truth into some kind error, doctrinal or practical error.  Love does not rejoice in doctrinal or practical error that contradicts the truth.  Love tells the truth, as Paul says in Ephesians 4, speaks the truth.
If someone wants to “feel loved,” actual love, then he should believe and practice the truth.  Love will rejoice in that.  Let’s try another thought experiment.  Let’s say that someone sees someone sinning, and tells this truth, “That’s sad.”  This isn’t even saying that it is sinful, just that it is sad.  The person who hears, that’s sad, should rejoice in that truth.  It is sad.  Everyone should support someone saying that sinful behavior is at least sad, and even something stronger than that.
If someone sees a disrespectful young person and says, “Honour thy father and thy mother,” that is not an attack.  That is the truth.  Love rejoices in the truth. The loving person would rejoice in Exodus 20:12.  Those who do not rejoice in that are the ones not loving.  They are the ones calling up, down, and down, up.  A young person should be told to honor his father and mother.  When he does not, that is not only sad, but it is not right.  It can’t be rejoiced in.  The truth must be told.
The Bible is a love-o-meter.  What Paul wrote is a simple love-o-meter.  Use it.  If you don’t use it, it likely means you are not a Christian.  You are not saved.  Love is of God. They that love, abide in God.  You don’t love.  You don’t even care what it means if you will not use the Bible to define it.

AUTHORS OF THE BLOG

  • Kent Brandenburg
  • Thomas Ross

Archives