Being Loving

[Svt4Him]

I often see people talk about love, and how Jesus loved and never condemned anyone. Although this is partly true, it's also partly false. Let me explain, but first compare now to then.

If someone came to you and asked what to do to be saved, what would you say? Now here's what Jesus said: "Go sell everything you have and follow me". The man left, sad. If you saw a person leaving sad, what would you say? Well, most would say share the love of God. Tell them they are loved, and win them back. Jesus did neither.

People talk about making Christianity simple, but is it? Is life simple, or anything for that matter? Jesus was with a group of people, and after one of His saying, the majority left because it was too hard of a saying. What would happen now if someone had a hard saying? Would they be allowed to say it?

People go out of their way to accommodate people, to the point that Christians get walked over, lest we offend and they don't become Christian. Jesus said "Follow me" and He didn't say it a second time to people who didn't want to listen.

Follow-up is now a key part of evangelism, lest those fish get away. Jesus said they are engraved on His hand, and He won't let those who are His get away. Can it be because we preach so much love, that we've forgot what love is? Can it be we forget God resists the proud, gives grace to the humble, while we want everyone to be loved by God, even if God's resisting them?

 

[Andyman_1970]

I often see people talk about love, and how Jesus loved and never condemned anyone. Although this is partly true, it's also partly false. Let me explain, but first compare now to then.

Now here's what Jesus said: "Go sell everything you have and follow me". The man left, sad. If you saw a person leaving sad, what would you say? Well, most would say share the love of God. Tell them they are loved, and win them back. Jesus did neither.

Didn't Jesus say this to the young rich guy? From what I understand, he was unwilling to get rid of what was the "god" of his life, his stuff.

Jesus did neither because Jesus (being God and knowing all) knew their hearts, and He knew who would respond and who wouldn't. We on the other hand do not know who will or won't respond. Sometimes we plant a seed, sometimes we are there to "close the deal". Sometimes that seed dies.

I certainly don't think we should give up on people becaue they may have a hard heart. God didn't give up on me (it took several people and several years before I came to Him) and I don't think we should give up on those around us. I think we in modern Christian America have got witnessing all backwards IMO. We are told that you go visiting on a certian night of the week or you go door to door handing out tracts (none of which are bad), but our witness as a community of believers is FAR LARGER than just those things. How we live for Jesus daily (love Him will ALL our heart, soul and strength (body)) is the most powerful witness we have to those around us.

Say someone who has been drinking the night before (and it is very apparent) shows up at your church on Sunday morning. What do you do and what should your attitude be towards that person (assuming they are not a believer)? Do we look down our "holy" nose and say "What are you doing here"?(as if to say your not spiritual enough to be here) Or do we love them (that word love would be agape) and point them to Jesus?

Jesus only came down on those that were acting religous and holier than thou (but actually didn't know God), not those that were screwed up and knew it.

There is this false notion floating around that you have to have it all together to come to Jesus. That's just flat wrong, people don't get rid of their "idols" and then turn to Jesus, they turn to Jesus THEN they get rid of thier "idols" [loose paraphrase of 1 Thess.].

Our job is not to clean them, that's Jesus' job.

Did any of that make sense?

 

[Jim B]

I often see people talk about love, and how Jesus loved and never condemned anyone. Although this is partly true, it's also partly false. Let me explain, but first compare now to then.

If someone came to you and asked what to do to be saved, what would you say? Now here's what Jesus said: "Go sell everything you have and follow me". The man left, sad. If you saw a person leaving sad, what would you say? Well, most would say share the love of God. Tell them they are loved, and win them back. Jesus did neither.

People talk about making Christianity simple, but is it? Is life simple, or anything for that matter? Jesus was with a group of people, and after one of His saying, the majority left because it was too hard of a saying. What would happen now if someone had a hard saying? Would they be allowed to say it?

Here are the virtues I am trying (with a little success) to live:

Galatians 5
22But the fruit of the Spirit is love, joy, peace, patience, kindness, goodness, faithfulness, 23gentleness and self-control. Against such things there is no law.

Ephesians 4
32 Be kind and compassionate to one another, forgiving each other, just as in Christ God forgave you.

Colossians 3
12Therefore, as God's chosen people, holy and dearly loved, clothe yourselves with compassion, kindness, humility, gentleness and patience.

James 3
17But the wisdom that comes from heaven is first of all pure; then peace-loving, considerate, submissive, full of mercy and good fruit, impartial and sincere.

1 Peter 3
8 Finally, all of you, live in harmony with one another; be sympathetic, love as brothers, be compassionate and humble.

1 Peter 5
5Young men, in the same way be submissive to those who are older. All of you, clothe yourselves with humility toward one another, because, "God opposes the proud but gives grace to the humble."

\o/

 

[Svt4Him]

Now I agree with those qualities, and I agree with love. But maybe love isn't just accepting everyone and pointing them to Jesus. To give a real example, there were two people living together, and weren't married. They are in sin, but the church doesn't want to offend, because that's not loving. Yet Paul says give them over to satan, that their souls will be saved. Would it be love to cause pain in order to save a soul, or love would ignore it and allow God to change them? Often we preach the cure that Jesus loves them, but no one understands the sickness. Modern evangelism has a 75-93% fail rate for new converts, which means we're having still borns all over the place. Is that love then just to tell them Jesus loves you and died for you?

 

[Andyman_1970]

Now I agree with those qualities, and I agree with love. But maybe love isn't just accepting everyone and pointing them to Jesus. To give a real example, there were two people living together, and weren't married.

The question is are they saved? If not, how can we expect them to live like Jesus when they don't even know Him?

They are in sin, but the church doesn't want to offend, because that's not loving. Yet Paul says give them over to satan, that their souls will be saved. Would it be love to cause pain in order to save a soul, or love would ignore it and allow God to change them? Often we preach the cure that Jesus loves them, but no one understands the sickness. Modern evangelism has a 75-93% fail rate for new converts, which means we're having still borns all over the place.

So what would be the answer if this couple is not saved? Tell them they cannot attend anymore? How are they going to learn about Jesus and come to Him if they don't hear the Word?

Jesus didn't come for the "healthy" He came for the "sick".

I believe (IMO) there is such a "failure" rate is that many many people come forward during an invitation and shake the pastors hand, but they never come to know Jesus.

Is that love then just to tell them Jesus loves you and died for you?

Isn't that the essence of the message of love? I guess I am not seeing your point here.

 

[Jim B]

Now I agree with those qualities, and I agree with love. But maybe love isn't just accepting everyone and pointing them to Jesus. To give a real example, there were two people living together, and weren't married. They are in sin, but the church doesn't want to offend, because that's not loving. Yet Paul says give them over to satan, that their souls will be saved. Would it be love to cause pain in order to save a soul, or love would ignore it and allow God to change them? Often we preach the cure that Jesus loves them, but no one understands the sickness. Modern evangelism has a 75-93% fail rate for new converts, which means we're having still borns all over the place. Is that love then just to tell them Jesus loves you and died for you?

I see what you mean and agree to a degree (poetry) but I do believe that a gentle approach at first is always best. Simply chastening people for wrongs (sins) only causes them to put up their defenses and reject what we say to them when we attempt to speak the truth in love. By pointing out their sin we leave ourselves open for them to slam us with our own less-visible sins (self-righteousness, hypocrisy, backbiting, gluttony, uncharitableness, hatefulness, etc.) and of social rudeness and basic lack of tact. Jesus did say something about motes and beams, I recall.

Speaking the truth in love and confronting sinfulness that is ruining those we love is being a good Christian. How we do it will have a lot to do on how it will be received. If our rudeness or hatefulness drives them away, what good have we done?

As for the example you gave, the church was not confronting in love and the situation became flagrant and even tolerated by the church. In fact, it even looks like the church was proud and boastful of their tolerance (see 1 Cor. 5.2, 6). Still, I do not think Paul found any pleasure in recommending the man be turned over to Satan. We do not have the details of the man’s attitude toward his sin, actions that were/weren’t taken, etc. In fact, Paul’s act was redemptive and had the man’s restoration in mind – “hand this man over to Satan, so that the sinful nature may be destroyed and his spirit saved on the day of the Lord,” 1 Cor. 5.5.

And apparently, the story has a happy ending: the man did find a place of repentance and was later restored to fellowship with Christ and the church (which is always the purpose of discipline).

2 Corinthians 2
1So I made up my mind that I would not make another painful visit to you. 2For if I grieve you, who is left to make me glad but you whom I have grieved? 3I wrote as I did so that when I came I should not be distressed by those who ought to make me rejoice. I had confidence in all of you, that you would all share my joy. 4For I wrote you out of great distress and anguish of heart and with many tears, not to grieve you but to let you know the depth of my love for you. 5If anyone has caused grief, he has not so much grieved me as he has grieved all of you, to some extent--not to put it too severely. 6The punishment inflicted on him by the majority is sufficient for him. 7Now instead, you ought to forgive and comfort him, so that he will not be overwhelmed by excessive sorrow. 8I urge you, therefore, to reaffirm your love for him. 9The reason I wrote you was to see if you would stand the test and be obedient in everything. 10If you forgive anyone, I also forgive him. And what I have forgiven--if there was anything to forgive--I have forgiven in the sight of Christ for your sake, 11in order that Satan might not outwit us. For we are not unaware of his schemes.”

\o/

 

[Andyman_1970]

Often we preach the cure that Jesus loves them, but no one understands the sickness. Modern evangelism has a 75-93% fail rate for new converts, which means we're having still borns all over the place.

<rant> IMO I believe there is such a "failure rate" because it's how we present the Gospel. We in American Evangelical Christianity tend to present the Gospel as a "legal transaction", say the prayer and get in, we present it as "fire insurance". There are whole frameworks of theology that are "join our team and some glad morning we'll all fly away".

This is not the message Jesus taught. Jesus spoke of walking in harmony and wholeness with God now. Jesus didn't say to people "hey I'll see you in heaven" He told them things like "Go in peace". Peace in the Hebrew is the word Shalom and means the precense of God, to walk with Him in harmony and wholeness and spiritual health.

We American (Greek thinking) Christians look at salvation as something that "will" happen in the furture, someday I'll get to heaven. But the Hebrew Eastern thought is that salvation is a way of life, in which you are set free to live as God intended you to live. We look at Kingdom of God as something detached from earth, but the Hebrew thought is that the Kingdom of God starts in this life and that eternal life is a life lived in harmony with God (now).

Why do I throw all this "Hebrew" stuff in? Because Jesus was a Hebrew, He thought like a Jew, lived like a Jew, ate like a Jew, and worshipped like a Jew. For us to know Jesus—and thus God the Father and the Holy Spirit—more intimately, we must look at our 21st-century culture and Western attitudes in relation to and in light of the 1st-century world of Jesus.

When we present the gospel (IMO) as simply a legal transaction or fire insurance, we are presenting a faith that is irrelavent for today.<rant off>

 

[Svt4Him]

I guess I'm thinking about how we've lost the power of the law to lead people to Christ, as people think the law is used to condemn. If people are sick, they will take the cure. If they don't know they're sick, they won't. My feeling is we use love so much that people don't understand the sickness, and then don't value the cure. The law is the school master that leads us to Christ isn't an often quoted verse in evangelism, nor is "The law of the Lordis perfect, converting the soul". My fear is the law is not used in evangelism because of "love". Law breaks the proud, grace welcomes the humble.

 

[Jim B]

I guess I'm thinking about how we've lost the power of the law to lead people to Christ, as people think the law is used to condemn. If people are sick, they will take the cure. If they don't know they're sick, they won't. My feeling is we use love so much that people don't understand the sickness, and then don't value the cure. The law is the school master that leads us to Christ isn't an often quoted verse in evangelism, nor is "The law of the Lordis perfect, converting the soul". My fear is the law is not used in evangelism because of "love". Law breaks the proud, grace welcomes the humble.

“My fear is the law is not used in evangelism because of ‘love’.”

Love is always good, and right, I am sure you will agree. I would say it this way, “My fear is the law is not used in evangelism because of timidity.” When we refuse to speak the truth - confront sin - in LOVE, it is not "love" that makes us unwilling to it. It’s cowardice that we may mask as love, but love, I believe, will confront with gentleness, compassion, and kindness and, of course, with their restoration as our goal.

\o/

 

[Ghost23]

as far as the fruit of the Spirit is concerned: there is only one "fruit" and there no "fruits." what i mean by that is the fruit of the Spirit is love, and the rest that follow arent actually fruits but characteristics of love.

as far as leading others to Christ. the reason the statistics are so high (75%-93%) is because people dont follow up on those they have led to Christ. we lead them to Jesus then leave them to fend for themselves. but we should know they cant fend for themselves because they are but newly born baby christians who need people there to build them up and disciple them. getting them saved is only the half of it. now its time to uproot, cultivate, and plant. so far what has been done is just a manner of speaking of what the love of Jesus is. now im not say all do this because i know its not the case for the other 7 to 25 percent of people who are getting discipled by christians. but that stat should be the other way around. the love of God does a full and complete job. we shouldnt just stop at the salvation part, but continue on into discipleship and loving them throughout their lives.