About Love

[Beetow]

● 1Cor 10:32-33 . . Give none offence, neither to the Jews, nor to the Gentiles, nor to the church of God: even as I please all men in all things, not seeking mine own profit, but the profit of many, that they may be saved.

The main idea here is courtesy with respect to cultural differences, viz: tolerance; defined by Webster's as sympathy or indulgence for beliefs or practices differing from, or conflicting with, one's own.
_

 

[Beetow]

● 1Cor 11:33-34 . . My brethren, when you come together to eat, wait for each other. If anyone is hungry, he should eat at home, so that when you meet together it may not result in judgment.

The command doesn't frown upon things like church banquets, men's' breakfasts, ladies' luncheons, and/or potlucks per se. What it's criticizing is a lack of congregational unity. Here's some comments leading up to that verse.

"Now in giving these instructions I do not praise you, since you come together not for the better but for the worse. For first of all, when you come together as a church, I hear that there are divisions among you, and in part I believe it. For there must also be factions among you, that those who are approved may be recognized among you.

. . .Therefore when you come together in one place, it is not to eat The Lord's Supper. For in eating, each one takes his own supper ahead of others; and one is hungry and another is drunk. What! Do you not have houses to eat and drink in? Or do you despise the church of God and shame those who have nothing? What shall I say to you? Shall I praise you in this? I do not praise you." (1Cor 11:17-22)

Their lack of courtesy and unity during church functions was nothing short of hypocrisy seeing as how The Lord's supper speaks of sacrifice rather than selfishness, elitism, and hoarding. In other words; seeing as how Christians all share in Christ's blood equally-- and deserve hell equally --then everyone should be given equal treatment at church regardless of age, gender, skin color, intelligence, income level, nationality, what side of the tracks they live on, or social status.

None of Christ's body parts are untouchable as if Christianity is a caste system; nor are any expendable. God forbid that there should be some sort of value system in a gathering of people for whom Christ suffered and died equally for each one. That just wouldn't be right: it would be an insult to the principles underlying The Lord's supper.

"Then he took the cup, gave thanks and offered it to them, saying: Drink from it, all of you." (Matt 26:27)

If Christians are all drinking from the same cup, then they should all be, at the very least, eating the same food and not be overly concerned about where they sit and/or who they sit next to and/or who they're seen with. And they should also make double sure that everyone gets enough to eat and that no one gets left out and nobody gets more than his fair share. And they should all sit down together at the same time. I just hate it when people don't wait for each other. Some get back to the table and start in gulping, slurping, clattering, and clanking while others from their table are still in line.

And they should also take into consideration the possibility that a number of their congregation are in assistance programs like TANF and SNAP. In other words; don't just bring enough food from home for yourself; but, if you're able, bring enough for those among you who can't bring anything at all. And for heaven's sake, don't bring a side dish of gourmet food along just for yourself. Leave your special gourmet stuff at home. There's just no excuse for flaunting your "sophistication" around church thus giving everyone the impression that everyone else's tastes are below yours.
_

 

[Beetow]

● 1Cor 12:24-27 . . God has combined the members of the body and has given greater honor to the parts that lacked it, so that there should be no schism in the body, but that its parts should have equal concern for each other. If one part suffers, every part suffers with it; if one part is honored, every part rejoices with it. Now you are the body of Christ, and each one of you is a part of it.

It's sad that congregations have been reduced to the level of an invasive species in some churches by over-achieving, ambitious types passing themselves off as pastors, deacons, and elders. Churches like that might just as well start selling tickets to their sermons and Sunday schools; and set up red carpets outside so the rank and file might crowd up like the Oscars; where they can ooh and ahh over the Cadillac Escalades and Lexus LX10's driven by their church's managers; admire their fashions, cheer, kiss derrieres, lick shoes, pose for selfies, and ask for autographs.

John Q and Jane Doe pew warmers aren't expendable commodities; nor do they constitute a fan base. You have to figure that, maybe not all but, at least a number of them have been placed in Christ's body by the very same Holy Spirit that places people in a church's hierarchy. God forbid that church managers should begin to think of their congregations as just numbers.

I once attended a mega Baptist church in San Diego that hired a hot shot business man that we all had to address as "reverend" to help them increase their membership. Why would they do that when there was 4,000+ members on the books already? Well; I'll tell you why. They had an ambitious building program in mind that couldn't proceed without more money in the church's coffers; so they needed to increase their tax base, so to speak. Well; Mister HotShot got the church's numbers up, and the managers got their building program. My wife and I bailed. We wanted no part of it.

» After the church's managers got the congregation deeply in debt to finance the building program, they all took new positions elsewhere, including the pastor, leaving his flock holding the bag. That was the most disappointing church I ever attended. It treated the congregation like so many head of livestock: just dollars per pound on the hoof and cheap labor easily exploited.
_

 

[Beetow]

● 1Cor 14:1a . . Pursue charity

The Greek noun for "charity" in that command is agape (ag-ah'-pay) which, in most cases, is a very easy kind of love to practice. Though agape may, or may not, include the sentiments of fondness and/or affection like the Greek word phileo (fil-eh'-o), it always exemplifies benevolence; defined by Webster's as the disposition to do good, i.e. kindness, consideration, generosity, courtesy, lenience, tolerance, patience, sympathy, assistance, civility, friendliness, etc.

"Agape does no harm to its neighbor." (Rom 13:10)

In a nutshell, agape love allows us to be nice to people without particularly liking them. For example:

"I say to you, love your enemies" (Matt 5:44)

The Greek verb for "love" in that command is agapao (ag-ap-ah'-o) which refers to the practice of agape. In other words: it's agape in action.

Love in either form; whether agape or phileo, is the impetus of many of Christ's commandments. Christians whose conduct lacks agape haven't even got to first base yet.

"For in Christ Jesus neither circumcision nor non circumcision has any value. The only thing that counts is faith expressing itself through agape." (Gal 5:6)
_

 

[Beetow]

● 1Cor 16:1-3 . . Now about the collection for God's people: Do what I told the Galatian churches to do. On the first day of every week, each one of you should set aside a sum of money in keeping with his income, saving it up, so that when I come no collections will have to be made. Then, when I arrive, I will give letters of introduction to the men you approve and send them with your gift to Jerusalem.

The "God's people" to whom Paul referred were Jewish Christians whose church was located at Jerusalem. They were having it pretty rough in the early days of Christianity.

Lest somebody should get the wrong idea, that wasn't a tithe. Christ left it up to each individual in Corinth the amount that they felt like donating towards the Jews' relief effort.

"Each man should give what he has decided in his heart to give, not reluctantly or under compulsion, for God loves a cheerful giver." (2Cor 9:7)

Tithes are not gifts; no, tithes are demanded rather than donated out of the goodness of one's heart. I don't give the government my taxes; no, they take them from me by force of law; viz: I pay taxes against my will, both reluctantly and under compulsion; and I have absolutely no voice in the parentage of my income that they take. When it comes to taxes: I am not cheerful; no, I am grudging. Well; that is not Christian giving. No; Christians have a faith that works by love, not by law. (Gal 5:6)

» It would be interesting to take a poll among America's churches just to see, out of curiosity, how many have a program for assisting Jewish Christians over in the modern State of Israel.
_

 

[Beetow]

● 1Cor 16:14 . . Do everything in love.

The Greek word translated "love" in this instance is agape (ag-ah'-pay) which doesn't necessarily indicate fondness or affection, but always indicates benevolence; defined by Webster's as the disposition to do good, e.g. generosity, charity, altruism, compassion, and sympathy, i.e. thoughtful, cordial, affable, genial, sociable, cheerful, warm, sensitive, hospitable, considerate, tactful, diplomatic, accommodating, cooperative, kind, courteous, lenient, tolerant, patient, helpful, civil, and friendly, etc.

In context; "everything" probably refers to the business of managing a church.

If a church officer's management practices tend to be more Machiavellian than Christian, then maybe he really ought to consider stepping down and finding himself a seat in a pew rather than a chair on the board. I mean it; this is not something to take lightly. 1Cor 16:14 isn't optional; it's mandatory.
_

 

[Beetow]

● 1Cor 16:15-18 . .You know that the household of Stephanas were the first converts in Achaia, and they have devoted themselves to the service of the saints. I urge you, brothers, to submit to such as these and to everyone who joins in the work, and labors at it. I was glad when Stephanas, Fortunatus and Achaicus arrived, because they have supplied what was lacking from you. For they refreshed my spirit and yours also. Such men deserve recognition.

Paul and his associates depended pretty heavily upon the hospitality of local believers for accommodations and daily necessities. Congregations do well to follow the examples of Stephanas, Fortunatus and Achaicus either by opening their homes to missionaries or by funding their stay in a motel and providing them with a rental car.
_

 

[Beetow]

● 1Cor 16:20 . . Greet one another with a holy kiss.

Kissing was a common form of greeting in the old world; and still is in the Middle East and certain parts of Europe; but here in America-- a super-sized racial/cultural/ethnic amalgam of customs from all over the globe --it's wise to dispense your kisses with discretion. Some of us don't even like to be hugged, let alone bussed; and if you should perchance try to make physical contact with an autistic Christian, you're liable to cause them a panic attack; so go easy on the touchy-feely stuff.

The people to whom Paul referred as "one another" are one's fellow born-again Christians. We're not required to be cozy with unbelievers. You can be courteous to them, yes (cf. Matt 5:47) but reserve especially warm greetings for your siblings; viz: those who've undergone a second birth as per John 1:12-13 and John 3:3-8, and thus share your adoption into God's home as per Rom 8:15-17.
_

 

[Beetow]

● 1Cor 16:22 . . If anyone love not The Lord, let him be accursed.

One's love of The Lord is exemplified by loyalty.

"If you love me, you will comply with what I command." (John 14:15)

"Whoever has my commands and obeys them, he is the one who loves me." (John 14:21)

"If anyone loves me, he will obey my teaching . . He who does not love me will not obey my teaching." (John 14:23-24)

Does a Muslim have to be a terrorist to be accursed? No; they only have to be a loyal follower of Muhammad ibn `Abdullāh instead of a loyal follower of Jesus Christ; same goes for Atheists, Nonreligious, Baha'i, Buddhists, Chinese Universalists, Confucianists, Jains, Kabbalah mystics, Shintoists, Spiritists, Taoists, Zoroastrians, Jews, Sikhs, and Hindus-- they're all accursed and there is nothing to be gained in arguing about it.

How many people am I talking about? Well, as of mid 2014, worldwide there were:

550,000 Scientologists
1,500,000 Mormons
8,200,000 Jehovah's Witnesses
7,794,000 Baha'i
515,951,000 Buddhists
451,292,000 Chinese Folk Religionists
8,424,000 Confucianists
974,597,000 Hindus
5,567,000 Jains
14,142,000 Jews
1,673,590 Muslims
2,819,000 Shintoists
24,918,000 Sikhs
14,183,000 Spiritists
8,660,000 Taoists
196,000 Zoroastrians
828,594,000 Nonreligious
692,111,000 Agnostics
136,483,000 Atheists.

The grand total of just those categories alone is 5,369,071,000

If those figures are in the ball park, and if classical Christianity is the reality; then a minimum of at least 75% of the earth's 2014 population of 7.2 billion people didn't love The Lord.

» Jehovah's Witnesses and Mormons are Christians in the popular sense, yes, but not in the classical sense.

Joseph Smith's movement is a spin-off; in other words: there's some classical Christianity in Mormonism, but comprises only a portion of Mormonism. The rest of it is extreme, to say the least.

Neither do Jehovah's Witnesses qualify as Christians in the classical sense. Charles Taze Russell's movement is a spin-off too. There's some classical Christianity in the Watchtower Society's doctrines, but comprises only a portion of Russell's doctrines; and his slant on it is very peculiar.
_

 

[Beetow]

● 2Cor 2:6-8 . . The punishment inflicted on him by the majority is sufficient for him. Now instead, you ought to forgive and comfort him, so that he will not be overwhelmed by excessive sorrow. I urge you, therefore, to reaffirm your love for him.

The cause for which Paul wrote that section was a guy in the Corinthian church sleeping with his stepmother (1Cor 5:1). Paul had commanded the congregation to not only hold the man's feet to the fire, but also to ostracize him.

Some time had passed since then, and the man was apparently regretting his actions, and broken off the illicit relationship with his kin, so it was time to let him back into the group. No doubt the humiliation of it all had a tremendous impact upon his attitude-- probably upon the congregation's too because at first their attitude wasn't all that good about it either. (cf. 1Cor 5:2)

Here in America scolding and ostracizing a church member would probably just make them indignant rather than repentant. (cf. Ps 51:17)

FAQ: Doesn't 2Cor 2:5-10 support the Watchtower Society's shunning, and Scientology's disconnection?

A: Those organizations practice an extreme form of ostracizing that oftentimes destroys friendship bonds, destroys family ties, and even destroys marriage vows. Paul never meant for Christ's followers to go that far. His ostracizing is pretty much limited to church, viz: congregational functions, e.g. worship, communion, prayer meetings, banquets, etc. Taking Paul's instructions to extremes puts people in jeopardy of failing to comply with Christ's instructions at Matt 5:44-48. (cf. 2Thess 3:14-15)
_

 

[Beetow]

● 2Cor 2:10-11 . . If 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, in order that Satan might not outwit us. For we are not unaware of his schemes.

One of the opposition's tactics is to create disunity in a church. Sure enough when that happens-- as when one portion of the congregation believes in judging and ostracizing while the other doesn't --people start taking sides and the church will end up divided into cliques and factions. According to the lord and master of New Testament Christianity, a house divided against itself cannot stand.

» Paul mentioned that his extension of forgiveness was "in the sight of Christ". There exists some controversy as to the exact meaning but I think it's just saying that Paul's forgiveness of that man was done in accordance with Christ's approval; to the end that the Corinthians all go along with it, i.e. stand together as one in their submission to Paul's decisions.
_

 

[Beetow]

● Gal 5:26 . . Let us not be conceited, provoking one another, envying one another.

Webster's defines "conceit" as: excessive self-appreciation of one's own worth or virtue.

There's nothing intrinsically wrong with having strong core values and/or believing in yourself, but if you should find yourself somewhat indignant and/or resentful when others don't believe in you, or when they think very little of your core values; then watch out because that's a symptom of conceit, and it will hinder you from obeying The Lord's orders in regard to getting along with fellow believers.

The Greek word for "provoke" is prokaleomai (prok-al-eh'-om-ahee) which means to challenge; viz: to get in somebody's face in an obnoxious, assertive, militant manner; which is a kind of behavior that prevents people from deserving identification with God's kin.

"Blessed are the peaceable: for they shall be called the children of God." (Matt 5:9)

The Greek word for "envy" is phthoneo (fthon-eh'-o) which means: hostile toward a rival, or towards someone believed to enjoy an advantage. In other words; we're talking about a competitive spirit-- not the good-natured, friendly kind but a malicious kind of competitive spirit that resents others doing better than itself, or more popular than itself, or more recognized than itself, or more admired than itself; viz; it's all about self.

Rivalry is a very destructive passion. It got Abel slain by his own brother, and it got Christ slain by his own people. Rivalry makes otherwise sensible people behave contrary to their own better judgment, and gets them embroiled in oftentimes unnecessary vendettas; e.g. gender rivalry and racial rivalry. Now those two there are very destructive social influences.
_

 

[Beetow]

● Gal 6:1a . . Brethren, even if someone is caught in the very act of any trespass, you who are spiritual restore such a one in a spirit of gentleness;

The Greek word for "trespass" is interesting. It can refer to willful misconduct and/or to unintentional misconduct. Seeing as how willful misconduct is dealt with harshly and summarily as per 1Cor 5:1-13 while in this situation gently, then I'd say Gal 6:1 is referring to unintentional misconduct; which doesn't merit a public flogging; but rather a quiet talk; and the more private the better in order to avoid embarrassing the unintentional offender.

Restoration does not apply to visitors; only to members on a church's roles; i.e. the congregation. The visitors' business is none of our business so don't go sticking your nose in it.

The Greek word for "restore" basically means to repair or adjust, viz: restoration applies to maladjusted Christians, i.e. the ones whose misconduct is habitual, and quite possibly detrimental to a church's overall health.

A spirit of gentleness precludes the use of bullying, intimidation, rage. yelling, demeaning comments, lecturing, scolding, biting sarcasm, ugly remarks, carping criticism, brow beating, and such. Those kinds of behaviors aren't gentle, no, they're cruel and abusive. They're also unwarranted when the accused has committed an unintentional trespass.

» The instructions given in Gal 6:1 pertain only to spiritual Christians; garden variety, rank and file pew warmers-- viz: marginal Christians --need not concern themselves with it.

In churches where people are conceited, assertive, confrontational, embroiled in petty rivalries, debating, quarrelling, and maybe even jostling for notoriety; the spiritual ones are obviously going to be as scarce as California Condors.

"each one looking to yourself, lest you too be tempted." (Gal 6:1b)

The Greek word for "tempted" is somewhat ambiguous. It primarily means to test; but can also mean endeavor, scrutinize, entice, and/or discipline.

I think what the restorers are being cautioned against is going about a right thing in a wrong way so that they themselves wind up taken to task for conduct unbecoming. In some people's minds, the end justifies the means so long as it benefits the so-called greater good. But that's Machiavellian thinking rather than Christian thinking.

In other words: the restorers need to tread lightly because if they go after an alleged offender like a lynch mob; then they themselves should expect to be seen by others as a toxic menace and a threat to peace, trust, and cohesion.
_

 

[Nicola Jane]

● Rom 12:8b . . If you have money, share it generously.

Generously is quite the opposite of sparingly.

Jesus once compared a widow's contributions to those of the wealthy. The small amount she gave counted more than the larger amounts contributed by the wealthy because her donation pretty much cleaned her out; while the wealthy's contributions scarcely made a dent in their prosperity. (Mark 12:41-44)

I don't think Rom 12:8b is commanding Christ's followers to ruin themselves, rather, to avoid being miserly.

“Christmas is a poor excuse every 25th of December to pick a man's pockets.”
Ebenezer Scrooge / A Christmas Carol by Charles Dickens

Ol' Scrooge is known the world over as the king of tightwads. He's an extreme example, to be sure; most people aren't that grasping, but I think quite a few are maybe a bit too frugal.
_

well brilliantly said blessed me.all your posts on love.
i am surrounded by family older kids hubby well for now in prayer and i can honestly say i never have experienced true love until recently its like had to lose every thing to see the fake love i thought was real so im loving discovering what real true love is in God and hearing and seeing all of the saints talk truth in love and share scriptures my heart is blessed and perfect God timing for me aswell in my life i got hope like never before so thankyou for sharing your words on and of love all healing to me seeing life very different and its lovely to meet real love in Gods true people .just thought id let you know thankyou and
God Bless You

 

[Beetow]

● Gal 6:2 . . Bear one another's burdens, and thus fulfill the law of Christ.

It's human nature to shun people with problems so they don't drag us into a world of inconvenience and/or negativity. But that is not what I call fulfilling the law of Christ; which reads thusly:

"A new command I give you: Love one another. As I have loved you, so you must love one another. By this all men will know that you are my disciples, if you love one another." (John 13:34-35)

The love that is defined by "As I have loved you" is a kind of love willing to suffer inconvenience, shame, humiliation, embarrassment, and disgrace for the sake of another. Christ's love isn't a fault-finding attitude; it's a supportive virtue: it doesn't only feel your pain, it gets involved in your pain.

Church can be the loneliest place on earth when nobody cares enough about you to get involved in your pain; but instead would just as soon not know about it. Sadly, there is about as much love for one another in modern churches as there is amongst an audience of strangers at the movies. I sincerely believe that a lot of that indifference has to do with modern churches just simply being too big, too busy, and too complex; where individuals are as anonymous and inconspicuous as a drop of pigment in a bucket of paint.
_

 

[Beetow]

● Gal 6:6 . . And let the one who is taught the word, share all good things with him who teaches.

That verse is commonly interpreted as referring to providing a teacher with material necessities. Well; it can mean that; but the Greek words for "share" and "good things" are ambiguous.

I suggest that Gal 6:6 refers to feed-back; i.e. to tell the teacher how and/or in what ways the things you've learned from him have been a help to you.

Some teachers just like to hear themselves talk; while others would like what they say to be useful. Feed-back can be very encouraging to the latter.
_

 

[Nicola Jane]

● Rom 14:1 . . Accept him whose faith is weak, without passing judgment on disputable matters.

A strong faith consists of the elements of knowledge, confidence, assurance, and conviction. A weak faith can be defined as vacillating; viz: one that's not all that sure whether something is wrong for a Christian; or even that something is right; in other words, a weak faith lacks the elements of knowledge, confidence, assurance, and conviction.

Disputable matters are matters of opinion rather than matters of fact. Opinions are often subjective, biased, and arbitrary, rather than objective, unbiased, and by-the book. Opinions inevitably invite perpetual debating that never really gets to the bottom of anything; which, in matters of spiritual significance is strictly forbidden within the context of the 14th chapter of Romans; because debatable matters are not matters of doctrine; but rather; matters of conscience.

We're not talking about black and white doctrines and principles here. Those are not open to debate. We're talking about gray areas.

"Thou shalt not commit adultery" is black and white; while issues like video games, music, fashions, foods, cosmetics, movies, self defense, gambling, swim suits, alcohol, tobacco, firearms, fasting, religious art, crucifixes, couture, and holy days of obligation are debatable. In regards to those areas; let every man be fully persuaded in his own mind rather than somebody else's mind.

Those are things about which each has to decide for themselves according to the dictates of their own conscience; and God forbid they should impose their personal dictates upon others and thus become dictatorial because that's playing God and usurping Christ's sovereign prerogative to make the rules for his own church.
_

really on point !!!
was having this conversation with a christian friend up north about gray areas and conscience so really well spoke
ill ask you if you dont mind
is it right to buy a dog for breeding purposes only plus a pet ??
as my son has done this and it does not sit well with me at all but he does not listen to me .I have two female dogs myself but would never breed them as they my dog babbies and would never risk their lovely lives for pure profit .your thoughts ? thankyou x

 

[Beetow]

is it right to buy a dog for breeding purposes only plus a pet ?? as my son has done this and it does not sit well with me at all but he does not listen to me .I have two female dogs myself but would never breed them as they my dog babbies and would never risk their lovely lives for pure profit .your thoughts ?

Sorry; no thoughts.
_

 

[Beetow]

● Gal 6:10 . . So then, whenever we have opportunity, let us do good to all men, and especially to those who are of the household of the faith.

Good can take any number of forms but I think a useful description we could apply here is the word "beneficial".

Jesus did good (Acts 10:30) i.e. he was very definitely beneficial; not just on the cross or by his teachings, but in non spiritual ways too.

Those who are of the "household of the faith" are actually kin; viz: siblings; and like they say: charity begins at home.

Some churches have what they call a deacon's fund; to assist members who are down and out and/or in dire straits.

And don't overlook your church's senior citizens. Some may be getting up in years and finding it difficult to even maintain their own homes and yards anymore. Chores may not seem all that spiritual; but pitch in anyway if for no other reason than your assistance is beneficial.
_

 

[Nicola Jane]

Sorry; no thoughts.
_

perfect truthfull answer x