It's all about love?

[Broncobilly1972]

Obeying the law is not what saves us, only a believe in Christ saves us. But it's not a believe that allows us to sit in our pews and worship 1 hour a week, and the rest of the week do as we please. It is a believe that requires action

Moreover it is required in stewards, that a man be found faithful. (1 Corinthians 4:2 KJV)

Faith without works is dead.

Too many people today claim you can still sin and get to heaven, little sin or big sin, it's still sin.

Being obedient is not something we can do on our own. It's too big for us, but we still have to try, look at what Moses said when he was given a task that was way to big for him. He didn't look for a way around it, he basically said ok I'll do it, who are you going to send with me. We see a task in front of us that is too big for us, keeping His commandments, and we allow others to tell us it can't be done you really don't have to do it. That's a lie. Christ says take my yoke, my yoke is easy, and my burden is light. Only with Him can we see how his commandments are easy. Eat all the pork you want to, I'm not saying pigs aren't good for food

 

[Jethro Bodine]

an example...

We should keep the law...

Now look in some of the threads about the law and see if there are any glandular responses. A calm biblical discussion does not occur, an opinionated, adrenaline driven foray develops.

See? It's one's interpretation that solicits the flame throwing. Many look at the passages you posted and filter it through other plain Biblical teaching that shows us that various first covenant commands of God no longer have to be literally fulfilled because of the finished work of Christ--work that has made them obsolete and no longer needed to be literally fulfilled. The commands for the various sacrifices for sin being the primary example of how the 'keeping of God's commands' does not mean every single command he has ever given as some insist it does.

 

[John 8:32]

See? It's one's interpretation that solicits the flame throwing. Many look at the passages you posted and filter it through other plain Biblical teaching that shows us that various first covenant commands of God no longer have to be literally fulfilled because of the finished work of Christ--work that has made them obsolete and no longer needed to be literally fulfilled. The commands for the various sacrifices for sin being the primary example of how the 'keeping of God's commands' does not mean every single command he has ever given as some insist it does.

My point exactly, what type of response was immediately produced?

 

[Broncobilly1972]

If you see my words as heated or emotional, then I apologize to you. They weren't meant that way. I thought this was a place for discussion apparently not. If you see my words as inflammatory then I don't know what to tell you.

 

[Broncobilly1972]

Think not that I am come to send peace on earth: I came not to send peace, but a sword. For I am come to set a man at variance against his father, and the daughter against her mother, and the daughter in law against her mother in law. And a man's foes shall be they of his own household. (Matthew 10:34-36 KJV)

For verily I say unto you, Till heaven and earth pass, one jot or one tittle shall in no wise pass from the law, till all be fulfilled. (Matthew 5:18 KJV)

if you say no some of the law is done away with, when Christ himself says it isnt, and you find it inflammatory that I believe what Christ says over men. Then it is what it is.

You set a trap, then try to Pull me in it and say I'm being inflammatory?

 

[thethinkingrebel]

My point exactly, what type of response was immediately produced?

See, you didnt mention anything about salvation, you just said..we should keep the law.

You're right, we should. Jesus fulfilled the law, and did not surpass it. The law exists, we should keep it, when we fail, repent.

We should keep the law. Otherwise what contrast is there? When are we doing bad? The law is written on our hearts, so we should be keeping the law.

 

[Christ_empowered]

I think its the church becoming worldly. The world is increasingly cool with this wishy-washy sort of "love" that demands nothing and gives nothing in return, but feels good in a sort of saccharine, sentimental way. Of course, this sort of "love" means giving up the hard work of repentance, obedience, and growth through trials, tribulation, and faith.

Its the difference between a sort of feel-good, "Have a nice day" sort of spirituality and the demanding, intense faith demanded of true Christians.

 

[Jethro Bodine]

Its the difference between a sort of feel-good, "Have a nice day" sort of spirituality and the demanding, intense faith demanded of true Christians.

In your experience what does a day of demanding, intense faith look like for the true Christian? Be specific.

 

[Bob Carabbio]

Love has some "Strings" attached.

"Recently there is a new wave of Christians preaching this new message 'it's all about love'."

Why would you think this is a "New Message". I've been hearing it for 50 years now.

"but part of me feels that the movement has some ditches or faults possibly."

And the problem is, of course, what one thinks "Love" is. Next to "Faith" there's probably no other "Religious term" that's been so utterly perverted in meaning.

"I agree with I cor. 13 that if you have not love you got nothing, basically. But why is it that a new-age, universalist, lost kid in mpls., mn is preaching the same message?"

And of course he's not preaching the same message at all - just using the same "Buzz words" with totally different meanings.

You never heard of the "Hashberry", the "Age of Aquarius", the "Flower children"???

That was 50 years ago - same message, same issues.

"Any one got any insight?"

Sure - We've got "Love" (Phileo - Fondness), and "Love" (Eros - Erotic) mixed up with "LOVE" (Agape - Lordship).

"Loving Jesus" has absolutely NOTHING TO DO with feeling "warm Bubblies" about Him (you may or may not). Fortunately that's unimportant, since Jesus' definition of "Love" (Agape) is that we are OBEDIENT to follow his commandments - REGARDLESS of how we happen to "Feel".

Remember the exchange with Peter in John 21:

15 So when they had dined, Jesus saith to Simon Peter, Simon, son of Jonas, lovest (Agape) thou me more than these? He saith unto him, Yea, Lord; thou knowest that I love (Phileo) thee. He saith unto him, Feed my lambs.
16 He saith to him again the second time, Simon, son of Jonas, lovest (Agape) thou me? He saith unto him, Yea, Lord; thou knowest that I love (Phileo) thee. He saith unto him, Feed my sheep.
17 He saith unto him the third time, Simon, son of Jonas, lovest (Phileo) thou me? Peter was grieved because he said unto him the third time, Lovest (Phileo) thou me? And he said unto him, Lord, thou knowest all things; thou knowest that I love (Phileo) thee. Jesus saith unto him, Feed my sheep.
18 Verily, verily, I say unto thee, When thou wast young, thou girdedst thyself, and walkedst whither thou wouldest: but when thou shalt be old, thou shalt stretch forth thy hands, and another shall gird thee, and carry thee whither thou wouldest not.
19 This spake he, signifying by what death he should glorify God. And when he had spoken this, he saith unto him, Follow me.

Peter "LOVED" (Phileo) Jesus - but that's NOT what Jesus was looking for (not that it surprised Him at all), and He seems to indicate that the SOLUTION to Peter's shortfall - was to be found in ministering to the "Sheep" - being obedient to his calling.

Your lost kid in Minneapolis probably would scream, and split at the first sign of "commitment", or need for obedience to a "Lord".

It's been said that:
When you do EVIL to somebody who does GOOD to you - you're behaving like satan.
When you do EVIL to somebody who does EVIL to you - you're behaving like an animal.
When you do GOOD to somebody who does GOOD to you - you're behaving like a human being - and demonstrating "Phileo".
When you do GOOD to somebody who does EVIL to you - you're behaving like Jesus - and demonstrating "Agape".

 

[thethinkingrebel]

"Recently there is a new wave of Christians preaching this new message 'it's all about love'."

Why would you think this is a "New Message". I've been hearing it for 50 years now.

"but part of me feels that the movement has some ditches or faults possibly."

And the problem is, of course, what one thinks "Love" is. Next to "Faith" there's probably no other "Religious term" that's been so utterly perverted in meaning.

"I agree with I cor. 13 that if you have not love you got nothing, basically. But why is it that a new-age, universalist, lost kid in mpls., mn is preaching the same message?"

And of course he's not preaching the same message at all - just using the same "Buzz words" with totally different meanings.

You never heard of the "Hashberry", the "Age of Aquarius", the "Flower children"???

That was 50 years ago - same message, same issues.

"Any one got any insight?"

Sure - We've got "Love" (Phileo), and "Love" (Eros) mixed up with "LOVE" (Agape).

"Loving Jesus" has absolutely NOTHING TO DO with feeling "warm Bubblies" about Him (you may or may not). Fortunately that's unimportant, since Jesus' definition of "Love" (Agape) is that we are OBEDIENT to follow his commandments - REGARDLESS of how we happen to "Feel".

Remember the exchange with Peter in John 21:

15 So when they had dined, Jesus saith to Simon Peter, Simon, son of Jonas, lovest (Agape) thou me more than these? He saith unto him, Yea, Lord; thou knowest that I love (Phileo) thee. He saith unto him, Feed my lambs.
16 He saith to him again the second time, Simon, son of Jonas, lovest (Agape) thou me? He saith unto him, Yea, Lord; thou knowest that I love (Phileo) thee. He saith unto him, Feed my sheep.
17 He saith unto him the third time, Simon, son of Jonas, lovest (Phileo) thou me? Peter was grieved because he said unto him the third time, Lovest (Phileo) thou me? And he said unto him, Lord, thou knowest all things; thou knowest that I love (Phileo) thee. Jesus saith unto him, Feed my sheep.
18 Verily, verily, I say unto thee, When thou wast young, thou girdedst thyself, and walkedst whither thou wouldest: but when thou shalt be old, thou shalt stretch forth thy hands, and another shall gird thee, and carry thee whither thou wouldest not.
19 This spake he, signifying by what death he should glorify God. And when he had spoken this, he saith unto him, Follow me.

Peter "LOVED" (Phileo) Jesus - but that's NOT what Jesus was looking for (not that it surprised Him at all), and He seems to indicate that the SOLUTION to Peter's shortfall - was to be found in ministering to the "Sheep" - being obedient to his calling.

Your lost kid in Minneapolis probably would scream, and split at the first sign of "commitment", or need for obedience to a "Lord".

It's been said that:
When you do EVIL to somebody who does GOOD to you - you're behaving like satan.
When you do EVIL to somebody who does EVIL to you - you're behaving like an animal.
When you do GOOD to somebody who does GOOD to you - you're behaving like a human being.
When you do GOOD to somebody who does EVIL to you - you're behaving like Jesus.

Totally agree, i cringe when i hear on the radio about "loving Jesus" or about being a "follower of Christ". There are New agers who love Jesus! Some even have him as their spirit guide.

We need to return to good, solid biblical christianity...if we did however, the sheople would run away in droves.

Faith in Christ
Repentance
Checking oneself
loving others as yourself
Loving completely and obediently both God the father, and his son Jesus.
Following the ten commandments
Keeping the sabbath
Non conformity to this world

And these arent rules, these are what we should be doing OUT OF LOVE, as a result of being born again. Screw denominationalism, this is what the disciples did, as well as the later apostles.

Not to mention preaching the gospel..

I would also mention that i fail dismally on all points above.

 

[Broncobilly1972]

Actually, the flower child movement, the age of Aquarius, and those types come out of theosophy. Which wasn't really new, but made its new debut in the mid 1800's, along with 3 other new doctrines. Not long after the official close of the spanish inquisition. No I'm not anti-catholic, I think all churches who claim Christ as their head have those who are truly seeking Him.

Theosophy is the feel good religion mixed in the church today.

 

[Christ_empowered]

The "demanding, intense faith" I wrote about isn't praying 5 hours daily or reading your Bible 6 hours daily. Its self-renunciation, repentance. I should not have used the term "real Christian" or whatever it is I wrote, because we're all trying to find our way in this world. I went to Jesus Camp, and although a lot of the stuff I was taught there I've learned to question, I did learn the importance of spotting and stopping sin, repentance, and obedience. I guess that's the kind of religion they give you at a place filled to the brim with drug addicts, alcoholics, and a few crazies (I was one of the crazies, of course).

I just think, from my limited post-Jesus Camp experiences, that sometimes Christians misinterpret "love" because of the way our secular culture has twisted the concept of "love." God's love, to me, involves taking someone (like me or any other Christian) who was born in sin, lived in sin, and will die in sin, and making them truly human. Freeing them from the sins that have effectively stolen their soul. So, even though I sin much more than I care to admit, I also think the "harsh" Jesus Camp religion taught me to be honest with myself about my sins and my need for forgiveness and--here comes that word again--"love." I don't always need a warm hug from God (not that I'd EVER turn one down), but I do need the sort of love that demands change, growth, self-examination, etc.

So, I apologize for sounding harsh and self-righteous, I do. I just think its important to distinguish traditional ("real") Christianity from feel-good ("therapeutic") Christianity.

 

[Jethro Bodine]

I went to Jesus Camp, and although a lot of the stuff I was taught there I've learned to question, I did learn the importance of spotting and stopping sin, repentance, and obedience.

I'm curious as to what they specifically pointed out as being sin, or if they just speak about it in a nebulous kind of way.

I just think, from my limited post-Jesus Camp experiences, that sometimes Christians misinterpret "love" because of the way our secular culture has twisted the concept of "love."

That's because by nature we can't grasp the concept of a 'love' that cares about people for their sake, not ours and what we might get out of it. Natural humans can only understand love in terms of caring about things and people because of the benefit that thing or person has to them personally. No benefit? No love. That's how we humans love.

It doesn't help that somewhere along the line we decided the one English word 'love' was sufficient to describe what the Greeks use four words to describe. It's true that all the loves are 'desire', but it is the motivation of the desire that determines what word one should use in any given situation (if we had four words for 'love').

In general, when the motivation of love is for the well being of the other person it is called 'agape'. That kind of love is usually characterized by the sacrifice it makes--because it's motivation is for the good of another and not your own, which usually means doing that is inconvenient or costs something. Only a fundamental change in a person's nature makes loving people that way--God's way--even remotely reasonable. That's why the Bible speaks of 'agape' as the signifying mark of the one who has been made a new creation in Christ.

God's love, to me, involves taking someone (like me or any other Christian) who was born in sin, lived in sin, and will die in sin, and making them truly human. Freeing them from the sins that have effectively stolen their soul.

Do you have specific sins in mind when you talk about sin stealing the soul of a person? This isn't about your sins. If I was asking for you to list the sins you struggle with, I suppose I should list mine first in all fairness. But that's not what this is about. I'm getting at the concept of love vs. sin.

So, even though I sin much more than I care to admit, I also think the "harsh" Jesus Camp religion taught me to be honest with myself about my sins and my need for forgiveness and--here comes that word again--"love."

Did the camp specify your need for God's love, or your need to give love? I'm curious.

I don't always need a warm hug from God (not that I'd EVER turn one down), but I do need the sort of love that demands change, growth, self-examination, etc.

In your understanding, how's does God's love demand change and growth and self-examination? I'm pretty sure I know how that works in my life, and how it can be a big help for people to know how that works so they can be sure they have the real thing going on inside of them.

I suggest God's love to us--which then causes a change of mind in us about sin--can be summed up in a single word (no, it's not 'love'--it's a specific application of love). And from there, a person must actually experience it, not just know about it and even believe in it, in order for it to change them. What would you say that is?

So, I apologize for sounding harsh and self-righteous, I do. I just think its important to distinguish traditional ("real") Christianity from feel-good ("therapeutic") Christianity.

(I didn't sense an ounce of harshness in your post.)

Why can't 'real' and 'therapeutic' Christianity be the same thing? I think it is the same. Joy is a fruit of the Spirit.

 

[Jethro Bodine]

Actually, the flower child movement, the age of Aquarius, and those types come out of theosophy. Which wasn't really new, but made its new debut in the mid 1800's, along with 3 other new doctrines. Not long after the official close of the spanish inquisition. No I'm not anti-catholic, I think all churches who claim Christ as their head have those who are truly seeking Him.

Theosophy is the feel good religion mixed in the church today.

It's interesting that Biblical love is a kind of hidden, or secret, or revealed knowledge among Christians, but the truth is it is so plainly taught in our Bibles, yet few 'see' those plain words. I think it's because we are so constantly preoccupied with the compelling needs and wants of fallen flesh--that 'deceitfulness of sin' thing. Sacrifice and inconvenience don't fit into the human vocabulary very easily.