"love thy neighbour as thyself"

[JM]

When Christ said, "love thy neighbour as thyself" he was referencing Leviticus 19.18. So, how do we love our neighbour? "Thou shalt not avenge, nor bear any grudge against the children of thy people..." We are to treat our neighbours lawfully, according to the law. It's not a sentimental kind of love but a love.

The complete quote reads, "Thou shalt not avenge, nor bear any grudge against the children of thy people, but thou shalt love thy neighbour as thyself: I am the Lord."

jm

 

[98cwitr]

Whats the difference between "loving our neighbor" and "loving our neighbor as yourself"

Seems to be a very dramatic difference in which whatever I can provide for myself and my family, I should provide for others as well. If that be so, a Christian in my mind would remain perpetually poor due to their constant charity.

 

[Emmy]

Dear JM. May I say this with love, Jesus told us in Matthew 22: 35-40:
" The first and great Commandment is: Love God with all thy heart, with all thy soul, and with all thy mind. The second is like it: love thy neighbour as
THYSELF. May I also point out please: God sees our hearts, and God knows our deeds: do we really treat our neighbour as we would love to be treated:
with kindness and compassion? Greetings from Emmy, your sister in Christ.

 

[JM]

Whats the difference between "loving our neighbor" and "loving our neighbor as yourself"

Seems to be a very dramatic difference in which whatever I can provide for myself and my family, I should provide for others as well. If that be so, a Christian in my mind would remain perpetually poor due to their constant charity.

I didn't even mean to start this thread! haha

I typed it up and thought I left before posting.

Provide for your family which is your lawful duty while not coveting, or seeking to avenge, holding grudges or gossiping (bearing false witness) about your neighbour which is also your lawful duty.

 

[Avid]

Whats the difference between "loving our neighbor" and "loving our neighbor as yourself"

Seems to be a very dramatic difference in which whatever I can provide for myself and my family, I should provide for others as well. If that be so, a Christian in my mind would remain perpetually poor due to their constant charity.

You can see that this does not say to provide for your neighbor as you would provide for your family. It, also, does not say to feed your neighbor as you would feed yourself.

Love toward those around us is not to be conditional upon their doing all we like or desire, or their being our best friend or favorite family member. The bad OPPOSITE of this is (an actual occurrence) the Preacher's daughter (an adult) stating she would never do as Jesus commands in feeding her enemy if she were hungry. This was stated during a Bible Study lesson on that very subject, and was specifically aimed at a neighbor with whom that woman had conflicts.

It amazes me when Preachers, Teachers, Deacons, and other "Churchgoers" REFUSE to do according to the very words of Christ. It is not isolated to this instance, either!

.

 

[98cwitr]

You can see that this does not say to provide for your neighbor as you would provide for your family. It, also, does not say to feed your neighbor as you would feed yourself.

Does love not include providing and feeding?

 

[MrJim]

Does love not include providing and feeding?

Kinda thinking the same...

 

[JM]

Love is a feeling, yes, but that isn't in sight when Christ quotes the OT. It's about proper outward behaviour.

 

[Avid]

Does love not include providing and feeding?

Do you not see that a Christian can show love to his neighbor as he loves himself? It is not that he does ALL THINGS as if he is his neighbor, or his neighbor is him (depending on your perspective.)

It seems you are describing ADOPTION, something that God includes in HIS work in the salvation of our souls. Do you see that you DO NOT need to adopt me to love me as you love yourself?


Example: If you are married, you do not want your wife doing immoral things with the guy next door. Also, you do not want that neighbor handling your wife, or gawking at her, or trying to get her to do immoral things with him.


Actionable legal issues can arise from this type of offense, and the perpetrator's own wife and family will likely shun him in the process. Most people who think this through are afraid of this, and do not pursue it for these reasons. That is carnal, natural and earthly.



So if you don't do any of that with your neighbor's wife for the motivation of Christian love for him, you are following Christ's command, and not the worldly law, per se! Can you see that this is not the same as being afraid of consequences of your offense? Then is the Seventh Commandment fulfilled. Also, part of the Tenth Commandment is fulfilled when you are not lusting after your neighbor's wife with a covetous heart.


Example: If you have a disagreement with your neighbor, you don't want to find yourself confronted with a knife or gun by that angry person. You do not want your life ended, because you have a basic, human love for your own self.



There are severe criminal penalties for each type of murder, and the pre-existing conflict sets up the perpetrator for a First Degree Murder conviction, and for the Death Penalty. Most people refrain for that reason alone. That is carnal, natural and earthly.



You should not imagine that you should kill him, or wish that he die in any other way. If don't do any of that to your neighbor, for the motivation of Christian love for him, the Sixth Commandment is fulfilled, and so on!

 

[Bluelion]

Does love not include providing and feeding?

98 you do do this with your taxs, and by voting for programs for the poor.

 

[ALoveDivine]

Really only the Holy Spirit can bring us the revelation of the meaning of this commandment, and he reveals it as the circumstances arise. What it means is always contextual. However, I interpret it quite literally.

If someone asks me for change, I will imagine myself in his position. I'd hate having to be in that position and would likely have no other option but to ask for help, in hopes of another's generosity. Consequently I will help the person, either giving them change or some food or in some other way.

To me it means to put yourself in someone elses shoes and then act as you would wish the other person to act toward you. More than that it means to equally care about another person as you would about yourself. You are hungry, so you eat. If you see someone who is hungry, you should be just as concerned to see to it that they can eat.

Actually the New Testament goes even further than this, saying we should put the needs of others before ourselves. How many of us can honestly say we practice any of this as we should? We are called to self-sacrifice, we are called to die to self, to pick up our cross, and follow Christ. There is no getting around this.

This is all very contrary to the American mentality, and that's fine with me. We must follow the words of scripture and the example of our Lord Jesus rather than the norms, mores, and attitudes of our culture.

When the Lord brings someone before you who is in need, you are commanded to help them by any and all means in your ability. No excuses, period. If you have to forfeit a meal so that they can have one, then that is what you do.

If we all lived this out, how much more would the light of Christ shine through us? How much more would the world tremble in awe at the God who leads us? It would blow peoples minds and could turn the world upside down. I think we need to go back to the words of Jesus and really start to take them seriously.

 

[98cwitr]

98 you do do this with your taxs, and by voting for programs for the poor.

I used to tell myself the same thing, but it was just an out for me not to personally help. So I was left, within myself, at a moral impasse. My tax dollars do not allow me to control (or even really know for sure) who is helped, and where and when, nor help those really in need versus those who choose to manipulate the system.

I am not for paying for people to be lazy and collect welfare for no reason other than they can. I am not for the government enabling people to do nothing:

2 Thessalonians 3:10 For even when we were with you, we gave you this rule: “The one who is unwilling to work shall not eat.”

 

[Bluelion]

I used to tell myself the same thing, but it was just an out for me not to help. So I was left, within myself, at a moral impasse. My tax dollars do not allow me to control (or even really know for sure) who is helped, and where and when.

I am not for paying for people to be lazy and collect welfare for no other reason than they can. I am not for the government enabling people to do nothing:

2 Thessalonians 3:10 For even when we were with you, we gave you this rule: “The one who is unwilling to work shall not eat.”

Its not about controlling who you help. Maybe that is the issue for you control?

If it is can I tell you a secret none of us control anything, control is an illusion. God is in control.

We are not to worry when we give that people take advantage or are Christian or not, we are reward either way. God who sees all will short out justice for those who take advantage. Trying to control who we help only makes a person bitter.

Should you also give to the Homeless man on the street, yes give to all that ask. But don't cut yourself short you help by working paying taxs and with your vote to help those in need. Maybe you don't feel like your helping because you don't see those you help, but trust me that is the best kind of giving because you do not boast of giving and are not proud of your gift. You are kept humble because you do not see those you help. Is that all you should do, No. But maybe God want me to let you know you help.

 

[standingtall]

I am not for paying for people to be lazy and collect welfare for no reason other than they can. I am not for the government enabling people to do nothing:

2 Thessalonians 3:10 For even when we were with you, we gave you this rule: “The one who is unwilling to work shall not eat.”

Exactly.

In addition, the idea we are somehow showing love by providing for and feeding the poor with our taxes isn't exactly New Testament "giving freely from the heart".

We HAVE to pay taxes or else risk imprisonment or fines, or both. So, in essence, it is a forced action. We're not giving "freely", and unless one can honestly say they love paying taxes to Uncle Sam, they're not giving anything to anyone out of love.

 

[98cwitr]

So, in essence, it is a forced action.

Great observation!

 

[Avid]

... But don't cut yourself short you help by working paying taxs and with your vote to help those in need. Maybe you don't feel like your helping because you don't see those you help, but trust me that is the best kind of giving because you do not boast of giving and are not proud of your gift. You are kept humble because you do not see those you help. Is that all you should do, No. But maybe God want me to let you know you help.

I see this a little differently. The Gvt taking tax money, and giving it to those THEY qualify as needing it, is basically wrong, and against the US Constitution (there were times I did not eat for days at a time, and would not have gotten anything from the Gvt if I asked.)

You may have a certain criteria for who you give to, and you may not. It is between you and God who you choose, but the Gvt wishes to take that option of charity away, and cause all the needy to beg THEM for help on THEIR terms.

Here are a couple of short videos explaining what I mean. Here are renowned Economists, Dr. Walter E. Williams and Dr. Thomas Sowell, explaining my point:

Walter E Williams - Government Charity - YouTube

This one is from about 1980...

Thomas Sowell - Welfare - YouTube

.

 

[JM]

Dude! Williams and Sowell? I love those guys. I read their collums with the Town Hall app.

 

[Avid]

Dude! Williams and Sowell? I love those guys. I read their collums with the Town Hall app.

I could listen to them all day, mix the 1980s with recent times, and not see much difference in their viewpoints during the 30 years between!

.

 

[Bluelion]

Well I guess it is forced giving so it does not count. My intentions were Good, but i see i have error and besides that you don't even support the programs.

With the crash of the housing market for the first time middle class families had to go to food banks, and use food stamps, I heard them on the news thanking these programs. It funny that a year earlier they were some of the people against them. Everyone is against them until they need them.

 

[Avid]

... Everyone is against them until they need them.

They come to need them because of the abuse of Gvt that cause problems that are not so easy for companies or individuals to ovcercome. People either lose their job, or other financial malady comes upon them, and they find themselves in need. NOW, this machine has caused MORE people to be dependent on them, and IT GROWS and does even MORE that requires MORE from the few that have anything...

Many years ago, it was very few that needed any help because there were opportunities that could be used by almost ANYONE. Poor, uneducated people could collect and haul trash. Now they are required to find a job, because Gvt makes it illegal to pick up trash and carry it to the dump for a fee!

If we run into such debts as that we must be taxed in our meat and in our drink, in our necessaries and our comforts, in our labors and our amusements, for our callings and our creeds, as the people of England are, our people, like them, must come to labor sixteen hours in the twenty-four, and give the earnings of fifteen of these to the government for their debts and daily expenses; And the sixteen being insufficient to afford us bread, we must live, as they do now, on oatmeal and potatoes, have no time to think, no means of calling the mismanagers to account; But be glad to obtain subsistence by hiring ourselves to rivet their chains around the necks of our fellow sufferers; And this is the tendency of all human governments. A departure from principle in one instance becomes a precedent for a second, that second for a third, and so on 'til the bulk of society is reduced to mere automatons of misery, to have no sensibilities left but for sinning and suffering... and the forehorse of this frightful team is public debt. Taxation follows that, and in its train wretchedness and oppression.
Thomas Jefferson, 3rd President of the US

.