Yo doctrine and theology had best be infused with love, empathy, and even some dreaded FEELINGS. I’ve known some very bold, blustery guys preaching doctrine and theology and they pulled that off beautifully, so the rest of us are simply without excuse. Our doctrine must be infused with love. It’s not optional, it’s mandatory.
He that loveth not knoweth not God; for God is love. -1 John 4:8
Love, empathy, even the dreaded FEELINGS, need not alter doctrine, theology, The Truth one little bit, but the absence of those things sure as heck will. God is love. Where there is no love, there will be no truth either. Zip, nada.
Doctrine and theology in the absence of love is literally theology with no God. Not to be too harsh here, but even the demons believe and know scripture. One might even say they have inside knowledge and a understanding of theology that far exceeds ours. That doesn’t make them good.
I want to mention the parable of the talents here to be found beginning in Matthew 25:14. This is not really a parable about investing money. It is a parable about what it takes to be a good servant.
“Master, I knew you to be a hard man, reaping where you did not sow and gathering where you scattered no seed. And I was afraid, and went away and hid your talent in the ground.”
And the Master says, “Throw out the worthless slave into the outer darkness; in that place there will be weeping and gnashing of teeth.”
If you believe your Master is a hard man who steals what is not His, unjust, unkind, harsh, judgmental, hypercritical, mean, lacking love, incapable of empathy, unmerciful, devoid of feelings, lacking natural affection, than that is the God you will serve.
That is also the God you will preach.
Is that God of the bible? I sure don’t think so. The God who gave His only begotten Son, the God who laid down His very life for us, is a God of love and mercy, a God who ironically had a few choice words to say to those preaching “doctrine and theology” back in the day. One might even say Jesus Christ had a few choice FEELINGS to express about that. “In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God”– John 1:1
It’s a shame because I really enjoy doctrine and theology, and I love, love, love The Word, both the Man and what is written in the bible, but those who insist on shrieking words of condemnation at others often leave a bad taste in my mouth. It is like a snake eating it’s own tail or perhaps like watching the bride of Christ gnawing off her big toe. She’s halfway up her own leg already. Gross, huh?
“Love” is a tough thing to define and pin down, but some synonyms are feel deep affection for, hold very dear, adore, think the world of, be devoted to, deep affection, fondness, tenderness, warmth, intimacy, attachment, and endearment.
So what is not loving? E-mailing me the word FEELINGS in 3 inch bold, shrieking at me about heresy, and claiming you have the authority to revoke people’s salvation. That is a NOT a loving act. A loving act is desperately interceding and grieving for a soul who has inadvertently now spoken those words over their own self. Loving is feeling sadness for someone who cannot feel and sense God’s love for them. I actually don’t doubt my own salvation when people scream “heretic” at me, I doubt yours.
Here is some “doctrine and theology,” some truth to to ponder. It’s really not heresy, it’s not “weird,” it’s not artsy, liberal, woo, it’s simply The Word, the truth. “Wherefore I say unto thee, Her sins, which are many, are forgiven; for she loved much: but to whom little is forgiven, the same loveth little.” -Luke 7:47
If one loves little that means one has been forgiven little, and if one has been forgiven little, one must ask why. Don’t ask me “why,” I haven’t got a clue. Ask God. That is what is at the very heart of repentance, metanoia. One might even call that sound doctrine.
See, there's this thing called biology... 
I wrote a response to your other thread on my PC that I have not been able to post because our internet is down here. It’s pretty much impossible to do on my phone. IT addresses what you talked about here. God in his word defines What Love Is and how it is done. God’s love only precedes from his truth. There is no such thing as love that is divorced from sound Doctrine. Though there can be sound Doctrine Without Love period I couldn’t possibly agree more. Like I say, this is very difficult to do on a phone. If there are any typos, it is because of my voice recognition software.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Tiribulus, don’t sweat the internet, we’ve got all the time in the world to discuss this issue, today and later on. It’s not going away anytime soon.
LikeLiked by 1 person
There are certain words in our language that have powerful meanings. When I hear the word love I think of dying to self.
The bible says without it we have nothing and we don’t know God.
God said love your wife more than you love yourself.
I thought it would be easier to change her to the way I thought she should be.
That don’t work.
What I’ve learned is without God I don’t have the power to love unconditionally.
Agape love is something only God can do through us.
LikeLiked by 5 people
Oh,amen! Without God none of us have the power to love.
Ha! Marriage is a fine example of something that can teach us that truth. Someone once told me of marriage, “don’t get frustrated, think of this as an opportunity to practice all your virtues.” Cracked me up, but there is truth there. I think I have helped my husband to exercise some of his virtues. 😉
LikeLiked by 2 people
Oh yeah plenty of opportunities to practice every spiritual principle there is…lol
I had a guy tell me that God put my wife in my life to help me become the man He intended me to be.
And I instantly believed him.
Have a blessed day.
LikeLiked by 1 person
I will try one more here though for now. There is nothing to dread about feelings, as long as they are governed by the mind and will, which in turn must be governed by the word. In other words by sound Doctrine. Feelings are from God. He designed them. As a very wise preacher once said, emotions make wonderful servants and disastrous Masters. The problem arises, when feelings are allowed to dictate Doctrine. What is doubly dangerous is that when this has happened, the person it has happened to, is usually by that time swimming in a subjectivity that prevents them from recognizing it.. post-modernism has lobotomized and poisoned Christendom on this continent. Everything is now based upon seeing results that feel good, rather than sound biblical thinking derived from sound biblical interpretation. It is a disaster on every level.
LikeLiked by 2 people
I can’t even remember the exact words you used when we first met, but it was an accusation of something along the lines of heresy and having an aversion to sound doctrine. To me, heresy is more like denying the Divinity or Christ or declaring all are saved whether they believe or not.
Heresy is not about praising the goodness of God.
One problem with focusing exclusively on the horrors of postmodernism, and declaring, “everything is now based upon seeing results that feel good” is that any and all results that “feel good” than become heresy. If it “feels good,” than an assumption is made that it cannot possibly be based on sound doctrine.
When that happens, you render mute every testimony to the goodness of God, every praise, every tale of healing to be found in the Lord. After all, knowing the love of God “feels good,” and if it “feels good” than it must be postmodernism, heresy, and not built on sound doctrine.
LikeLiked by 2 people
Pingback: Infused With Love – In through One door and out the other
“Though I [Paul] speak with the tongues of men and of angels, but have not LOVE, I have become sounding brass or a clanging cymbal. And though I have the gift of prophecy, and understand all mysteries and all knowledge, and though I have all faith, so that I could remove mountains, but have not LOVE, I am nothing. And though I bestow all my goods to feed the poor, and though I give my body to be burned, but have not LOVE, it profits me nothing”. – 1Cor. 13:1-3.
Sometimes we have to appreciate and employ ‘tough love’ – but THAT is a human version of compromise in the face of unrelenting trouble. GOD does NOT – ‘agape love’ is ETERNAL, ABSOLUTE, UNCOMPROMISING, and UNCONDITIONAL based on GOD’s Omnipotence, Mercy and Grace. The Holy Spirit provides born again believers with ‘agape love’ not only to cover our sin and seal our redemption, He also equips us to share it with others.
“Blessed be the God and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ, the Father of mercies and God of all comfort, who comforts us in all our tribulation, that we may be able to comfort those who are in any trouble, with the comfort with which we ourselves are comforted by God”- 2Cor. 1:3,4.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Really good stuff, IB. Okay, here we go! 🙂
To say that feelings should not matter is actually pretty absurd and, ironically, unbiblical. But typical in our stainless steel, rationalistic Western culture that tries to strip all of the beauty and wonder out of God and Bible. We exalt the intellect and distrust feelings. To love God with all our heart, soul, mind, and strength, and love others as ourselves (Matt.22:37-40) is to fulfill all of the Law and Prophets. The word “heart” here means the seat of our affections. Affections are feelings! To deny this would be like telling my wife I love her but I have no feelings for her! We would normally call that sociopathic, not something healthy.
We believe with the heart first (Rom.10:10). Our mind always follows our heart, good or bad (Luke 6:45). The course of our life is determined by our heart (Prov.4:23). This is why it’s absurd to dismiss our feelings.
Axiomatically, God is love, which means God is other-centered and relational (Father loves the Son in the Spirit, etc.). You can’t have love by yourself! This is why John said if we don’t love others we are liars when we say we know God. Love is only found in relationship with God in Christ, and with each other, not in Bible study by itself. The mind is not the final indicator of truth. Truth is a Person, which means the only way to know the Truth is by being in relationship with the Person, Jesus Christ.
Not only is truth without love a lie, but truth must be spiritually discerned (1 Cor.2:13-14). The mind is no more trustworthy than our heart by themselves. And spiritual discernment includes intuition and other non-intellectual senses. Without the Spirit our mind is just as lost as our feelings. So the mind is also a terrible master. The Pharisees used their mind and knew their doctrines, inside and out, yet they crucified their own Messiah. This is why we are told we have a spirit, soul, and body. The spirit has primacy. Otherwise, we end up worshiping a God limited to our mind instead of having His mind (1 Cor.2:16).
Sorry for the long comment, but I have to go to a meeting and thought I would get it all out in one shot. 🙂
LikeLiked by 1 person
Oh, amen! Amen to all of it. I keep trying to explain Truth is a person, too. That seems to really bother some people, but outside the context of love and the personhood of Jesus Christ, “truth” has no meaning, nothing to define it.
You can leave a long comment anytime,just don’t be late for any meetings. 🙂
LikeLiked by 1 person
I would agree with your men vs. women observation, IB. Men are more compartmental, less in touch with their honest emotions than women. I’ve see this over and over when we’ve counseled couples over the years. The woman goes on and on about how she feels and the man can’t put a whole sentence together about his honest feelings! As I said in my other comments to MJThompson, men tend to be more compartmental than women. And that’s a gift under extremely stressful situations, but potentially devastating in love and relationships.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Mel – Doctrinally – in a Pharisaic frame of mind – you’re right on. But your initial critique regarding FEELINGS seems to have missed IB’s main point.
Reminiscent of Bill Clinton’s famous dodge to direct questioning: “That depends on what your definition of ‘is’ is” – equating FEELINGS with ‘affections’ is naive, and a subtle misrepresentation of love and right relationships.
In proper English grammatical terms ‘affection’ is a noun (a person, place or thing), while ‘feeling’ is a verb – (a doable action). One may ‘feel’ ‘affection’, but the terms are NOT synonymous. So, I can have affection without FEELINGS.
The central premise of Scriptural teaching on FAITH is that it operates contrary to FEELINGS, and that it is FAITH that is necessary to please GOD. While emotional ‘warm-fuzziness’ may accompany such proper FAITH, that is NOT a requirement, nor is it a staple. The distinction between the two (affections and feelings) is therefore needed. We walk by FAITH, not by sight – meaning we are NOT to depend upon emotions (FEELINGS).
Perhaps it is true that an emotionally charged relationship with God is congruent with a preferred state of union, frequently God allows us to walk through the valley of death void of FEELINGS of well being – to assure us that our relationship with Him is not dependent upon such FEELINGS, which are always susceptible to a constant state of flux. Christ is our ROCK, never changing – if that makes you feel good, OK. But whether or not you ‘feel ‘ anything about that FACT – doesn’t matter, because it remains true regardless. Peace!
LikeLike
This is a really fascinating debate MJThompson, one I’ve had a few times.
It’s kind of interesting too, men and women can have this different perception of feelings. My husband will tell you that if you want to do the right thing, often you must act contrary to your feelings. His view is that feelings tend to lead you astray. He must shut down some of his feelings to be aligned in God’s will.
Flip that around however, my feelings always support the moral choice. If I have to do something contrary to my feelings, it’s sure to be immoral. There’s a caveat there however, my feelings are aligned with God’s will. In order to go against God’s will, I must shut off my feelings. How do I know some thing is wrong? It will “feel” wrong.
This can be a tough idea to explain, because how do you prove it? We live in this feel good world were if it feels good, it must be good, right? Wrong, we know that’s not true.
However, if God were to send me into some miserable situation, I promise you, He would make me “feel good” about it first. That not like “happy, joyous,” but rather certain I am going in the right direction.
That does not mean feelings alone rule the day. You could have just eaten bad pizza. But feelings combined with reason, with scripture, become intuition.
Not quite so true of men, at least in my experience. And God does sometimes leave them in that more rational state for longer periods of time. Even little boys sometimes, so I suspect it has a lot to do with some differences in brain chemistry.
LikeLiked by 1 person
IB- I can’t purport to know exactly what a woman ‘feels’, but I’m empathetic as near as is possible without embracing some ungodly notion of transgenderism. LOL.
Seriously though, As a counselor it has come to my attention that male and female ‘approaches’ to identical situations are from extreme polarities. Even in informal routines men tend to attempt explanations prefaced by, “I think”, whereas women begin with, “I feel”. Neither are intrinsically right or wrong – just different.
Further extrapolation reveals that accordingly, women are much more ‘in touch’ with their feelings pertaining to all emotional realms of intuition, spirituality, romance, faith, and true love. Sometimes we men BECOME aware of those things, but it usually takes a woman to reveal them to us. Of course, this is NOT a matter of ABSOLUTES, there seems to be an exception to most ‘rules’.
What men do intrinsically THINK is that women are smart, but we must acknowledge THAT upfront ( and specifically ask, “what do you THINK”) if we desire a valid answer about what they THINK, instead of having to wade through what they’re feelings are first. Sadly, men are rather ‘hard-wired’ to need a rational comprehension of things, especially a woman’s thoughts, BEFORE we can truly appreciate their feelings.
LikeLiked by 2 people
“Sadly, men are rather ‘hard-wired’ to need a rational comprehension of things, especially a woman’s thoughts, BEFORE we can truly appreciate their feelings.”
Isn’t that the truth? And so it probably should be, because there is always that chance that we have just eaten bad pizza. 🙂
A lot of men however, forget that we’re also not supposed to lean into our own understanding. So too much rational comprehension can actually lead us astray, too. You need that nice complementary nature going on to truly get the whole picture, not just among men and women, but within our own selves too.
LikeLiked by 1 person
“Reminiscent of Bill Clinton’s famous dodge to direct questioning: “That depends on what your definition of ‘is’ is” – equating FEELINGS with ‘affections’ is naive, and a subtle misrepresentation of love and right relationships.”
“So, I can have affection without FEELINGS.”
I would respectfully disagree with your statements here. You cannot honestly separate affections and feelings. Affection is defined as “a gentle feeling of fondness or liking.” So, by definition, feelings are subsumed within the very nature of our affections. Feelings and affections are synonymous unless the person is either not able to feel (sociopath, etc.) or they are stuffing their feelings because of some stoic paradigm they believe. Good or bad, our heart will always determine the course of our life (Prov.4:23), and that involves our affections, which involves our feelings (what we treasure). So, in the end we follow our heart anyway. We just might’ve rationalized it away somehow in our mind, thinking we aren’t doing this. But it’s the truth, just the same.
But I totally agree with your statement about Faith overriding feelings (and our mind). Faith is our access point to everything in the Kingdom. Faith must come first.
But we must not separate our affections from our feelings; that’s compartmentalization and actually not being in touch with our feelings. This is why men have more trouble with feelings than women, Women are more relational; men tend to be more compartmental. Compartmental is good in combat or stressful situations, but potentially devastating in love and relationships.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Mel – Thank you for further clarification of your understanding. I respect your point of view and right to freely express it. However, this is an en-passe where the best outcome is likely to simply agree to DISAGREE.
As is too often the case with interpretations, semantics blurs absolute comprehension. You say toe-mah-toe, I say to-may-to.
But the two words(‘affection’ and ‘feeling’) are frequently grammatically different parts of speech in English. ‘Affection’ and ‘feeling’ can be, and often are both nouns; but ‘feeling’ can also be an adjective, adverb, or a verb depending upon the context in any given sentence. Thus the two are only SOMETIMES to be construed as synonymous, but not always. The emphasis on discerning the times when such a distinction is important either assists or hinders a proper interpretation.
In the specific case of their relativity to Godly relationships it is entirely possible to maintain a right relationship with God void of ‘feeling’. I would agree so far as to admit that such an experience would be less preferable, but it is an unscriptural stretch to say it is necessary. Also, the fact that at times both are nouns, it is just as likely that in sentences where both appear as nouns that they are meant to CONTRAST each other within THAT specific context.
Conversely, in the CONTEXT of the very example you give as a definition = “Affection is defined as “a gentle feeling of fondness or liking.” So, by definition, feelings are subsumed within the very nature of our affections. Feelings and affections are synonymous unless the person is either not able to feel (sociopath, etc.) or they are stuffing their feelings because of some stoic paradigm they believe” – ‘gentle’,’fondness’, and ‘liking’ are all used as adjectives describing the noun ‘feeling’. There ‘feeling’ has been substituted for ‘affection’. But in the specific context of your example = “Affection is defined as “a gentle feeling…” – the modifiers (adjectives) ‘gentle’, ‘fondness’, and ‘liking’ are necessary to qualify the specific ‘feeling’ as synonymous.
Because ‘affection’ is ALWAYS positive, never negative (not to be confused with a wrong object), while
“feeling’ is neutral and can be good or bad, happy or sad, cold or warm, etc. the idea that the two are ALWAYS synonymous is naive. Peace!
LikeLiked by 1 person
“As is too often the case with interpretations, semantics blurs absolute comprehension.”
You’re right there! This is the problem with language…the words we use. 🙂
I also agree that we aren’t saved by feelings; we’re saved by grace through faith, regardless of our feelings. My point was only that if you love, you will feel. But I hear you! We’re really in disagreement here.
Grace and peace to you, brother.
LikeLiked by 2 people
Mel – Again, further clarification (like good diplomacy) brings us closer to a mutual respect that, like our personal relationship with God, is far more important than words could ever adequately express. So, I hope, “May the Lord continue to bless you” suffices.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Amen. Perfectly said. No ambiguity there! Blessings.
LikeLiked by 1 person
I meant we’re really NOT in disagreement here. (It’s those words again! Haha!) 🙂
LikeLiked by 1 person
I would argue that love for God and neighbour is at the heart of all Christian doctrine. It is a doctrine that teaches that in all of life’s circumstances, we are to be concerned for the welfare of our neighbour and to seek His highest good, even unto Salvation.
Sometimes our neighbour needs to hear the condemnation of the Law so that they may feel contrition and repent. Sometimes, in their brokenness, they need to hear the comfort of the Gospel.
We are called to speak both, and sometimes we get them mixed up, applying Law when Gospel is needed and vice versa.
We get it wrong a lot. But it too, is covered by Christ’s blood.
What we are definitely NOT to do is pronounce judgement – this one is a Christian, this one is not. Even God’s Holy Law, by which we all stand condemned, does not go that far. It is Jesus who will pronounce judgement.
Sound doctrine is VITALLY important to the life of the church. I harp on its importance all the time!! (“Like” this comment if you’ve noticed that about me!) There’s a very simple reason. Somebody has to. There have to be voices that say we need to preserve this, lest we one day lose it all. There are certainly churches out there who have already lost it all, teaching stuff that is so far from orthodoxy that it’s a wonder they still call themselves Christian. We call that heresy.
All doctrine is love. If we lose doctrine, we lose love.
Jeez. That was rambly
LikeLiked by 2 people
Wally either genuinely likes this comment, or he has “noticed this about me”.
LikeLike
https://insanitybytes2.wordpress.com/2017/03/09/infused-with-love/
Insanity Bites SAYS: “To me,…”
Those are the two deadliest words in the English languages and the very definition of post-modern apostasy. God does not care what anything is TO YOU. (He doesn’t care what anything is to me either btw)
It is He who commands light, matter, time and space to exist from nothing and they obey Him. It is He alone therefore who is the triumphant conquering King of all that is.
You are not.
There is no “to me” in God’s truth. ALL things are by HIM, through HIM, for HIM and to HIM.
“…any and all results that “feel good” then become heresy. If it “feels good,” then an assumption is made that it cannot possibly be based on sound doctrine.”
Absolutely false. That would still be making feelings the standard. God Himself is the standard and He reveals Himself everywhere, but most explicitly in His SCRIPTURES.
SCRIPTURE, in other words sound doctrine, is the only foundation for legitimate feelings and alone provides the spiritual and intellectual environment wherein they can be experienced without sin.
If something feels good without sound doctrine it is deadly deceptive idolatry and an abomination to the God of historically orthodox (YES that REALLY does matter) Christianity.
Do you think it felt good when Paul and Silas were singing to Jesus while chained in a Roman dungeon, beaten and bleeding (for instance) for the testimony of the Lord? It depends on what is meant by “feel” and “good” doesn’t it? How do we know? We know from the SCRIPTURES.
No testimony is legitimate unless it comports with what one looks like in the SCRIPTURES. The devil will be happy to get somebody clean and sober. Get them a job, fix their marriage, help them move past abuse, TAKE THEM TO CHURCH. He’ll pick them up and drive. As long as he can keep them from knowing the one true and living God and His Christ in whom alone is salvation and life.
Tricks like “The Shack” have been his stock in trade since the Garden when he first successfully cast doubt on God’s word. The gate is small and the way is narrow that leads to life, and there are few who find it Gabrielle. I’ll be literally damned before I will stand before His throne and try to explain why I lead people in the broad and tolerant way of destruction like most of today’s false church is.
Men (And women) like me stand on the shoulders of multitudes of great champions of the faith who believe you me, would be a lot harder on you than I am if they were here to see. There is nothing extreme or peculiar about my views, OR the way I preach them. It only appears that way because of how tragically far today’s styrofoam apostate American Christendom has fallen.
LikeLike
“Master, I knew you to be a hard man, reaping where you did not sow and gathering where you scattered no seed. And I was afraid, and went away and hid your talent in the ground.”-Matthew 25:14
“Wherefore I say unto thee, Her sins, which are many, are forgiven; for she loved much: but to whom little is forgiven, the same loveth little.” -Luke 7:47
Scripture, Tiribulus. The very origins of the same doctrine you claim to defend so enthusiastically. I am at a loss with all you warriors out there attacking me, because I fear if you perceive me as the enemy, as an unsaved, heretical, false prophet, than you never actually met the Lord I serve and the path is narrow indeed.
Anyone who would ever confuse me with the enemy, has never met the enemy either.
If you haven’t got love, you defend a faith that is like trying to grasp oil in your right hand. When the times comes, you will find your lamp is empty.
LikeLike
I have to go for a while.
Define love for me please? I’m being totally serious. Copying and pasting 1st Corinthians 13 is not an answer btw. Too easy to pour postmodern American definitions into all those descriptions.
No hurry.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Tiribulus – WRONG! Without “to me” it is IMPOSSIBLE to be saved. Unless and until a personal acceptance of Christ’s atonement occurs “to me”, I have NOT accepted Christ or His redemption.
LikeLike
Allow me to throw in here too please that NObody will have it rougher at the judgement than those with the most tremendously sound and pristine theology who nonetheless practiced worldliness and sterile dead doctrinal orthodoxy.
They are the most reprehensible of all. Right now I know otherwise rock solid Westminster Presbyterians (and LBC 1689 Reformed Baptists) who are the very definition of the spiritually decomposing worldly pharisee.
It is quite possible to have fabulous doctrine and no spiritual life or love.
It is however not possible to have Biblical life and love with false doctrine.
Charitable works that do not proceed from faith in and to the glory of the one true and living God are sin.
God cares that what we DO be based upon true BELIEF. We must believe correctly first and then act based upon those true beliefs. Of course people are at differing levels of time in the Lord and maturity of instruction. There’s a vast difference between somebody who truly doesn’t know better yet (immature), and somebody who doesn’t care (postmodernist).
As I say. Somebody can have a personal library of 10,000 volumes of puritan and reformed orthodoxy and teach seminary for 50 years and be every bit as damned as the worst unchurched heathen on earth.
LikeLike
TIRIBULUS – I agree with your conclusions regarding certain scholars and so-called doctors of theology. Being one of them, I have witnessed much hypocrisy within our ranks. However, you would do well to research your claims of having rightly embraced sound doctrine because your profession of personal faith is NOT consistent with the teachings of Christ or the proper comprehension of GRACE.
LikeLike
MJThompson – WRONG! You missed my point entirely.
Can we just let Gabrielle give her definition of “love” please? As I say, no hurry whatsoever. If it takes days or weeks, that would be fine. I don’t expect people to leap into action at my request.
LikeLike
I can tell you what love is. I could write volumes. I can point you to hundreds of words of scripture, but it would mean nothing because love is something you can only really understand once you’ve met grace personally.
“Wherefore I say unto thee, Her sins, which are many, are forgiven; for she loved much: but to whom little is forgiven, the same loveth little.” -Luke 7:47
LikeLike
Gabrielle says: “I can tell you what love is. I could write volumes. I can point you to hundreds of words of scripture, but it would mean nothing because love is something you can only really understand once you’ve met grace personally.
“Wherefore I say unto thee, Her sins, which are many, are forgiven; for she loved much: but to whom little is forgiven, the same loveth little.” -Luke 7:47”
I’m going to assume that it only appears to me, and mistakenly so, that you are suggesting that I have not met grace personally? And that I don’t believe myself to have been forgiven enough to love like the woman in Luke 7:47? That appears to me to be the case, but I will assume, as I say, that that is not your intent unless you affirm that it is.
I refuse to believe however that you are not capable of supporting the thesis of your life in a coupla few concise yet dense paragraphs.
You keep saying that I, and people like me, are unloving. That is an assertion and assertions are as valid (or no) as the truth (or no) upon which they are built.
If you tell me that truth and love are just not able to be expressed in propositions, but only in experience, then I will tell you that that IS unbiblical postmodern gobbledygook.
God commands us to love.
I’m asking you honestly. What is this love that the Lord commands according to His word, the bible? You DO believe that right? I’ve never actually asked you that. You do believe that the bible is God’s infallible inspired word? Please note that I didn’t ask if it contains God’s word, if it becomes God’s word as we experience or if the writERS were inspired.
I asked if the writINGS are the inspired infallible WORDS of God Himself. That’s not an accusation, it’s a question. I really don’t know.
LikeLike
Love is forgiving you because I know typing is not your best form of communication. Love is letting go of all the harsh words you always pour over me. Love is setting down the offense of your ridiculous questions to constant accusations. Love is enduring your endless pride and arrogance, the way you believe yourself worthy to even ask me such questions. Love is not mocking you as if you fancy yourself some kind of soldier in the Spanish Inquisition. Love is not blowing my cork when you burden me with trite and foolish questions as if I am a soft target for your gotcha games.
Love is looking at the evidence before me and still believing that you must have some redeemable qualities. “Now faith is the substance of things hoped for, the evidence of things not seen,” right?
No, you do not believe yourself to have been forgiven enough to love like the woman in Luke 7:47. That should be self evident since you do not actually love like her. If you did, you would have recognized me immediately as a child of God rather than one of your postmodern, apostolic, woodstock loving, boogeymen.
LikeLike
This is one long begging of the question Gabrielle,. You assume a (false) definition of love, and then attack me for failing to practice it,
If this is your actual answer, you have no idea what biblical love is. No cork blowing required. Here, let’s try this. You ask me anything you want and I’ll answer as best I know how. I will consider it no burden whatsoever. Go ahead. I’m serious.
I’ll tell you the same thing I tell everybody. You owe me nothing and are not accountable to me. That’s not the point here at all. I’m simply asking a question. One person to another. Therefore I will in good faith answer any question you have first. Go ahead.
LikeLike
““… harsh words you always pour over me.”
I do not want to do that. (you have NO idea 😦 ). You wouldn’t actually hear me if I didn’t though. I wish I could apologize. I have never been more serious 😦
LikeLike
Did you miss the part in James about the power of our tongues, about how we can speak life over people or speak death?
Our own words don’t condemn others, they condemn us. I know this well, you’re talking to someone who could out curse a sailor and chop people into little bits with my words, but I don’t because the Lord I serve was gracious towards others even when they crucified Him.
I would have cursed us all, doomed us forever, but He simply said, “forgive them Father for they know not what they do.”
I can’t live up to that fully, but earlier you spoke of God’s honor and glory. That is how we pay Him honor and give Him glory.
LikeLike
Gabrielle says: “Did you miss the part in James about the power of our tongues, about how we can speak life over people or speak death?”
But you’re begging the question again Gabrielle. You are asserting that I am violating that passage based upon subjective definitions you are assuming out of hand. That’s the point. Today’s feminized postmodern church has redefined biblical principle, including the gospel itself, and then acts like those of us who refuse to accept these new definitions are the ones with the problem.
The burden is on you to overthrow centuries of biblical understanding and practice. Everything I’ve said here the last few days AND the way I’ve said it, would have gone unnoticed in previous generations before the last few decades.
Declaring that “harshness” is ipso facto unloving, may be a nobrainer to your friends here, but your friends here are not the standard. Scripture is the standard.
If what I’m saying about what you’re advancing is true, then how I’m saying it is more than justified. If what I’m saying is not true then a whole bunch of historical saints are wrong too, because I’m only saying what they said. Since your views are the new and innovative ones, as I say, the burden is on you to overthrow the long standing old ones. Assertions will never accomplish that.
“Our own words don’t condemn others, they condemn us. I know this well, you’re talking to someone who could out curse a sailor and chop people into little bits with my words, but I don’t because the Lord I serve was gracious towards others even when they crucified Him.”
Amen! 🙂 Let’s just say that I wasn’t always a believer either.
Nobody’s cursing you or chopping you into little bits for Pete’s sake though. That’s not the point 😦
LikeLike
“The burden is on you to overthrow centuries of biblical understanding and practice.”
I’m rather pleased with centuries of biblical practice and understanding, so I think not.
Also, you need to come down off your hobby horse because there is nothing subjective or femininzed about what James has to say about the power of the tongue and how we should treat one another. Those words actually apply to you, right here and right now.
You are and you have violated the words in those passages. If you want to go to war with the feminized church and postmodernism that is your business, but you are talking to a sister in Christ at the moment and I expect you to treat me accordingly.
LikeLike
“I’m rather pleased with centuries of biblical practice and understanding, so I think not.”
If challenged, I could put together a comment citing men of God from these centuries past demonstrating quite persuasively that they would not go along with you.
Can you name for me a few recognized church leaders who lived before the turn of the 20th century who you feel confident would endorse “The Shack” as you have please? You have every right to tell me that you’re not playing my games and you don’t owe me any answers, but that will not gain credibility for your view. You are also welcome to say that you don’t care how credible your view is to me and I’ll understand. What you cannot do is produce those names.
“…there is nothing subjective or femininzed about what James has to say about the power of the tongue and how we should treat one another. “
You interpretation and application of James words is what I was rejecting. Not the words themselves. God forbid.
“…If you want to go to war with the feminized church and postmodernism…”
Every believer is by definition in that war Gabrielle. Whether they like it or even recognize it or not.
“…you are talking to a sister in Christ at the moment and I expect you to treat me accordingly.”
I’m going to ask you again in front of everybody this time. Let’s talk. You have nothing to fear from me. Everybody here is seeing me say this. Hanging up is a click away anytime you choose. Nothing bad and lots of good could come from that. I bet there would be better understanding and I have no doubt I’ll like you more than I already do. I’m not kidding. You may find out I’m not exactly how you think too.
LikeLike
“You interpretation and application of James words is what I was rejecting. Not the words themselves. God forbid.”
No. Those words are plain as day. There is no interpretation going on here, no subjective application, nothing wishy washy about it at all. It is you who are rejecting those words, not me.
You keep saying let’s talk and telling me not to fear. We are already talking and if people fear you, I am sorry that happens. I’m going to say it might have something to do with your approach.
LikeLike
This is not talking. It’s communication, but it’s not the same.
Not everybody is as extroverted as I am.
Believe it or not I get more reluctance from men. Really.
LikeLike
You are not extroverted, you are jerk with exceptionally bad manners. Of course you get more reluctance from men, they tend to be more sensible than we are. They would wisely declare, “just throw that fool off our planet and be done with him.”
Women tend to lean more towards mercy, something which you apparently are too stupid to understand. Mercy is not wrong, mercy is a reflection of our Lord and Savior. I really suggest you become acquainted with it, because what you are doing is really not serving to advance the kingdom at all. In fact, you’re doing a great deal of harm and making my job much more difficult.
LikeLiked by 1 person
THAT’S not very nice Gabrielle. 😦
Jerk?
Fool?
Stupid?
You can scour the web from Dan to Beersheba (so to speak) and you will never find me ever calling anybody names like this. Not even when they wish a slow gruesome agonizing death upon myself and my family. (yes, I’ve had some God hating atheists actually do that)
And who ever ever suggested that mercy is wrong?
There is a God in heaven who knows that I have no hostility toward you whatsoever. Not even a little. Come on. Let’s video chat 🙂 You can even yell at me if you want to. I promise you, I’m not being antagonistic.
LikeLike
Those are truthful words. You have come barreling in here like you often do and began attacking people, as if you and you alone are the only great defender of the faith. The rest of us? Heretics, woodstock loving harpies, postmodernists, and whatever other rubbish you come up with. As I said, you really need to come down off your hobby horse and join the rest of the human race.
Also, how like a postmodernist for you to virtue signal and presume to lecture me about how noble your own name calling is! And than to brag about having endured a bit of atheist hostility? What are you, a special snowflake or something?
LikeLike
Even if what you said were true Gabrielle, that’s not post modernism.
My offer stands. You have me all wrong. I’d love to talk to you.
In the meantime, a good overview of how postmodernism has affected the church can be found HERE. Phil Johnson like 10 years ago.
LikeLike
Well well, I’m glad I went back and read this! Tri , I feel for you, your battle just seems a little out of place on this blog,. I B , well you got your hackles up right away! Gee guys it sure looks like you both are so battle weary that you might have forgotten who the real enemy is, sure doctrine is important, but I started a relationship before I had all my doctrine down, but wait, I’m still working on it, oh Pooh, am I really saved ? Yup! And I usually the hard way, like when I heard the spirit guide me one-way and a friend another, which was right? Turns out we were at different places in our walks and had different things to learn. Some things we need to speak up about, some we Just take to the Lord. I like Matthew 18 first you go to your brother, then you take witness’s, why, because it may be you that is wrong, both sides must be tried, and we don’t want to go around taking things to the. Church that should have been worked out in private. Remembering , one perfect, and it wasn’t me or you, but Christ alone.
Hoping my doctrine hasn’t offended anyone, to this has been a great challenge to figure out what might be going on, and look back at myself, miserable as that Is!
Looking up,
LikeLike