Thoughts on Loving Others
So, as our base comparison, Jesus met all sorts of people who were not part of accepted religious society...prostitutes, the repeatedly divorced, tax collectors, etc. who society really, really looked down on, in ways we can't really compare to.
Christians can say "The gays" or "abortion doctors" or "communists", but it doesn't really compete.
But Jesus met these people, and they knew that they were loved by Jesus, and their lives were changed by that contact, and they were willing to listen to what he said about them.
By comparison, people meet today's Christians and are repulsed, they run screaming. Which says to me that we're doing something wrong.
An example that I was given recently was a relative of mine, "We have several folks who fall into the LGBT ranks that attend our church. Four that I can think of that haved (sic) attended for a long time. They are welcomed and loved but they are not told that their lifestyle is fine or that it not a sin. I am glad they keep coming because Christ died for sinners and their best hope is to be in an atmosphere where the Holy Spirit can bring conviction. [my wife] told one of her gay students who confronted her and called her a homophobe, " I am not afraid of you, I am afraid for you."
Let's consider the message here.
1. The God of love is going to torture you forever.
2. The way you are is a choice, not your nature, which means that your entire existence is a lie until you admit that you're straight.
3. I love you anyway.
What kind of love do we practice by telling people that they are liars, that the things that we believe about them are more true than the things that they believe about themselves?
In my experience, many people say that they love me who never actually talk to me at length, or interact with me. They feel love toward me, and speak to others of their love for me, but in practice, their love is a love of tolerance. They allow me to exist as I will exist over here, and they will exist in the way that they exist over there, and if one of us goes to hell as a result, well, they should have listened better.
So, it seems that maybe Jesus was doing something differently.
I will note that you cannot find Hell incorporated with the Gospel of the Kingdom of Heaven until about the fourth century of the church. Prior to that, the message of the Gospel is precisely about finding and participating in the Kingdom of heaven, and participation in the church was only open to those who would show up and pay their dues. Often, people would have to take part in particular activities as a christian for a year before they could be baptized, and until then, might only know one other Christian.
And their numbers still grew exponentially. They didn't make it easy for people to join, but the way that they lived and loved drew other people who were starving for love and community.
In Second Peter 1:3-8, Peter expresses this idea that our knowledge, our theology, should lead us to a greater knowledge of God, of Christ. And in knowing Christ, our character develops, so that we take on the attributes of love, in being more patient, more wise, etc. and that out of this, we become brotherly in our love toward others, eventually becoming active practitioners of Agape love, which is an unconditional, compassionate, active love toward those around us. Not a love of tolerance, but of engagement, and reciprocity...not a reciprocity that waits for a return, but an active reciprocity that overwhelms with it's indwelling, responsive nature, much in how we picture the Trinity.
I would argue that when people are truly loved, it provides ample, fertile room for God to change people in whatever way they truly need to be changed, but Christians, instead, want people to change first before we truly love them, and until then, we only tolerate them, and call it love.
Finally, and perhaps most importantly. I don't get to define whether my Agape was effective. I can't say "Well, I loved him as much as I could, and he didn't respond, I guess he's just a jerk." I don't get to decide whether what I did to love somebody was actually perceived as love. In fact, I may be loving them by my standards, and actively expressing hate or judgement to them by theirs. This may require me to find tune the way that I love specific people, based on their experiences.
I know that there are those who would argue that people need to know how they are failing to live up to a moral standard, but my response would be that most people don't feel like they have room in their lives to do anything about that, precisely because they're surrounded by so much judgement. They need love, they need grace, to have the room to become something else. When they hear that they are judged, that they are liars, that there is fear about them, any further messages about love are an afterthought, they're meaningless.
I don't get to decide whether I have loved somebody enough that it's earned me the right to rebuke them. They have to tell me that I have that relationship with them, through their words and actions.
But we Christians don't want to wait, don't want to have to depend on reciprocity. We want to assume the moral high ground first. And as a result, we get to hold that ground alone.
Christians can say "The gays" or "abortion doctors" or "communists", but it doesn't really compete.
But Jesus met these people, and they knew that they were loved by Jesus, and their lives were changed by that contact, and they were willing to listen to what he said about them.
By comparison, people meet today's Christians and are repulsed, they run screaming. Which says to me that we're doing something wrong.
An example that I was given recently was a relative of mine, "We have several folks who fall into the LGBT ranks that attend our church. Four that I can think of that haved (sic) attended for a long time. They are welcomed and loved but they are not told that their lifestyle is fine or that it not a sin. I am glad they keep coming because Christ died for sinners and their best hope is to be in an atmosphere where the Holy Spirit can bring conviction. [my wife] told one of her gay students who confronted her and called her a homophobe, " I am not afraid of you, I am afraid for you."
Let's consider the message here.
1. The God of love is going to torture you forever.
2. The way you are is a choice, not your nature, which means that your entire existence is a lie until you admit that you're straight.
3. I love you anyway.
What kind of love do we practice by telling people that they are liars, that the things that we believe about them are more true than the things that they believe about themselves?
In my experience, many people say that they love me who never actually talk to me at length, or interact with me. They feel love toward me, and speak to others of their love for me, but in practice, their love is a love of tolerance. They allow me to exist as I will exist over here, and they will exist in the way that they exist over there, and if one of us goes to hell as a result, well, they should have listened better.
So, it seems that maybe Jesus was doing something differently.
I will note that you cannot find Hell incorporated with the Gospel of the Kingdom of Heaven until about the fourth century of the church. Prior to that, the message of the Gospel is precisely about finding and participating in the Kingdom of heaven, and participation in the church was only open to those who would show up and pay their dues. Often, people would have to take part in particular activities as a christian for a year before they could be baptized, and until then, might only know one other Christian.
And their numbers still grew exponentially. They didn't make it easy for people to join, but the way that they lived and loved drew other people who were starving for love and community.
In Second Peter 1:3-8, Peter expresses this idea that our knowledge, our theology, should lead us to a greater knowledge of God, of Christ. And in knowing Christ, our character develops, so that we take on the attributes of love, in being more patient, more wise, etc. and that out of this, we become brotherly in our love toward others, eventually becoming active practitioners of Agape love, which is an unconditional, compassionate, active love toward those around us. Not a love of tolerance, but of engagement, and reciprocity...not a reciprocity that waits for a return, but an active reciprocity that overwhelms with it's indwelling, responsive nature, much in how we picture the Trinity.
I would argue that when people are truly loved, it provides ample, fertile room for God to change people in whatever way they truly need to be changed, but Christians, instead, want people to change first before we truly love them, and until then, we only tolerate them, and call it love.
Finally, and perhaps most importantly. I don't get to define whether my Agape was effective. I can't say "Well, I loved him as much as I could, and he didn't respond, I guess he's just a jerk." I don't get to decide whether what I did to love somebody was actually perceived as love. In fact, I may be loving them by my standards, and actively expressing hate or judgement to them by theirs. This may require me to find tune the way that I love specific people, based on their experiences.
I know that there are those who would argue that people need to know how they are failing to live up to a moral standard, but my response would be that most people don't feel like they have room in their lives to do anything about that, precisely because they're surrounded by so much judgement. They need love, they need grace, to have the room to become something else. When they hear that they are judged, that they are liars, that there is fear about them, any further messages about love are an afterthought, they're meaningless.
I don't get to decide whether I have loved somebody enough that it's earned me the right to rebuke them. They have to tell me that I have that relationship with them, through their words and actions.
But we Christians don't want to wait, don't want to have to depend on reciprocity. We want to assume the moral high ground first. And as a result, we get to hold that ground alone.