juantoo3
Well-Known Member
Get thee behind me...you twist scripture constantly.
How much love is too much?
- Thread starter Faithfulservant
- Start date
juantoo3
Well-Known Member
Kindest Regards, Prober!
Exactly! Amen!
S
Silas
Guest
It's the people who cry out like that who God delights to saves. Those who realize their sin and utter worthlessness, and those who want to change from being such, when they cry out for mercy, will recieve mercy. God will get the glory, and they the joy.
wil
UNeyeR1
No such thing as too much love or too much forgiveness.
I don't believe G-d sees anything but good.
You meant it as evil but G-d makes it good.
We learn from every misstep, sometimes it takes us years, decades or lifetimes, but we learn.
No matter how 'evil' our humaness our material nature percieves a person or an event, it is all part of our lesson here in 3d. And as we go on we either learn from it or retake the course.
Unconditional love is what we are hear to learn, this universe was prepared for us to learn it, and each soul we encounter provides the next lesson.
G-d the good, omnipotent, our source for our supply would provide none less. While we are in the midst it is hard to see, but we have shining examples in our past and in our present who are pushing the envelope. The more we forgive, the more we love, the faster, the shorter the turnaround....our knowing, that it is all good...for G-d made it that way.
I don't believe G-d sees anything but good.
You meant it as evil but G-d makes it good.
We learn from every misstep, sometimes it takes us years, decades or lifetimes, but we learn.
No matter how 'evil' our humaness our material nature percieves a person or an event, it is all part of our lesson here in 3d. And as we go on we either learn from it or retake the course.
Unconditional love is what we are hear to learn, this universe was prepared for us to learn it, and each soul we encounter provides the next lesson.
G-d the good, omnipotent, our source for our supply would provide none less. While we are in the midst it is hard to see, but we have shining examples in our past and in our present who are pushing the envelope. The more we forgive, the more we love, the faster, the shorter the turnaround....our knowing, that it is all good...for G-d made it that way.
C
cyberpi
Guest
Luke 17:3 Take heed to yourselves: "If your brother sins, rebuke him, and if he repents, forgive him."
There is condition there. Conditional. I submit again that Jesus was a conditional servant. Correct?
I agree that a person has to be prepared in his heart to forgive anything and everything... for his own welfare. When in the mind something hinges on one's own benefit rather than for the other then I have personally found there is a lesson yet to be learned. So many demand Justice from others and yet Mercy for themselves. The folding over of the roles are simply divine. So I think one is best to forgive in the mind but to leave the rebuke on the table and draw away from sin unless the person (or company) repents.
I recently had this re-emphasized with me this month as I was deceived by a company to the tune of $1k. Internally in this company responsibility is denied and their customer service is militant... I ended up speaking with one of their lawyers vaguely by email. If nobody rebukes them for it then they are not guilty so I am thinking of a token lawsuit for zero damages or maybe a penny if there is a minimum. Not for my gain. If I were a lawyer it could easily be a class action lawsuit. With the rebuke though, they are guilty and God does the rest. I simply wish the issue to be better understood within the large company, and to alter their ways. It is a tool for change. The company is publicly traded and its history and the parallels are intruiging, having been in the news in recent years.
But, unconditional Love? Is it not Love to teach one's children what you know and to rebuke them and put them in timeout when they misbehave? Just because some of us are adults does not mean we are not still children. I find lessons all over the place to learn from, and my assumption is that they are from God. I find that he is a master choreographer.
There is condition there. Conditional. I submit again that Jesus was a conditional servant. Correct?
I agree that a person has to be prepared in his heart to forgive anything and everything... for his own welfare. When in the mind something hinges on one's own benefit rather than for the other then I have personally found there is a lesson yet to be learned. So many demand Justice from others and yet Mercy for themselves. The folding over of the roles are simply divine. So I think one is best to forgive in the mind but to leave the rebuke on the table and draw away from sin unless the person (or company) repents.
I recently had this re-emphasized with me this month as I was deceived by a company to the tune of $1k. Internally in this company responsibility is denied and their customer service is militant... I ended up speaking with one of their lawyers vaguely by email. If nobody rebukes them for it then they are not guilty so I am thinking of a token lawsuit for zero damages or maybe a penny if there is a minimum. Not for my gain. If I were a lawyer it could easily be a class action lawsuit. With the rebuke though, they are guilty and God does the rest. I simply wish the issue to be better understood within the large company, and to alter their ways. It is a tool for change. The company is publicly traded and its history and the parallels are intruiging, having been in the news in recent years.
But, unconditional Love? Is it not Love to teach one's children what you know and to rebuke them and put them in timeout when they misbehave? Just because some of us are adults does not mean we are not still children. I find lessons all over the place to learn from, and my assumption is that they are from God. I find that he is a master choreographer.
juantoo3
Well-Known Member
Kindest Regards, Cyberpi!
There is a difference in applying blanket judgementalism towards other individuals in a bigoted way, and focusing on redressing a specific harm. We return again to the lesson of "turn the other cheek," and again I stress that is an Aramaic idiom that means "do not start a hateful thing with your neighbor, but if your neighbor starts a hateful thing with you then you have a right and obligation to nip it in the bud." Apples and oranges.
You have been specifically dealt with deceitfully (presuming what you have said is truthful, and I have no reason now to believe otherwise). The matter is not a matter of faith, nor an issue within a congregation (although that one can get a bit sticky). Yours is an issue of principle, with interest (
)! G-d did not intend Christians (or any of His other children) to be doormats. We are to be wise as serpents and gentle as doves, to not let the right hand know what the left hand does. In a civil matter, it is only wise and proper to seek civil counsel to redress a civil wrong.
Let me begin by saying I am sorry for your unfortunate state of affairs, and I certainly hope for the best (as in "G-d's will") in the end.
There is a difference in applying blanket judgementalism towards other individuals in a bigoted way, and focusing on redressing a specific harm. We return again to the lesson of "turn the other cheek," and again I stress that is an Aramaic idiom that means "do not start a hateful thing with your neighbor, but if your neighbor starts a hateful thing with you then you have a right and obligation to nip it in the bud." Apples and oranges.
You have been specifically dealt with deceitfully (presuming what you have said is truthful, and I have no reason now to believe otherwise). The matter is not a matter of faith, nor an issue within a congregation (although that one can get a bit sticky). Yours is an issue of principle, with interest (
)! G-d did not intend Christians (or any of His other children) to be doormats. We are to be wise as serpents and gentle as doves, to not let the right hand know what the left hand does. In a civil matter, it is only wise and proper to seek civil counsel to redress a civil wrong.
juantoo3
Well-Known Member
To nobody in particular...
On the issue of judging (as opposed to being judgemental), it is right and well and even wise to judge what is a correct way to live one's life. I mean, there are some pretty foolish activities going on in the world, and any person with a lick of sense is going to discern between matters that are wise and matters that are foolish, for themselves and those in their charge (like minor children, for instance). That is where rebuking the folly of a brother (sister) comes in...if your brother is strung out on crack cocaine, yeah, rebuke the daylights out of him...but you can't stop loving him. You may be the only lifeline and chance of hope he may have.
Now, this treads into troubled waters, because this is just as easily misinterpreted to mean becoming an enabler of foolish behavior...and that is distinctly *not* what I mean.
I must judge in what manner I wish to live my life. But my judgement is not to be directed at others with a bullhorn. It is well that I share wisdom with my brothers and sisters in an effort to spare them the pain and suffering that go with foolishness, but I must also realize at the same time that we all come to G-d in our own time and by our own ability. I too, am not always wise, occasionally I may act foolishly. Because of this, I have no room to point a finger or cast judgement at others. Yet, if I can spare another the heartache of foolishness, then I have saved a brother or sister from the error of their way. I cannot insist unless they are my charge, and even then it is a troubled road to travel (speaking of being too hard on teenagers, driving them to rebellion). Forgiveness and mercy says we will fall short, but I can still love you in spite of falling short, because I too fall short. As long as we are making any sincere effort, we needn't point fingers and create stumbling blocks for each other, we need to be there to help each other get back up off the ground and dust off when we fall. And we will fall.
On the issue of judging (as opposed to being judgemental), it is right and well and even wise to judge what is a correct way to live one's life. I mean, there are some pretty foolish activities going on in the world, and any person with a lick of sense is going to discern between matters that are wise and matters that are foolish, for themselves and those in their charge (like minor children, for instance). That is where rebuking the folly of a brother (sister) comes in...if your brother is strung out on crack cocaine, yeah, rebuke the daylights out of him...but you can't stop loving him. You may be the only lifeline and chance of hope he may have.
Now, this treads into troubled waters, because this is just as easily misinterpreted to mean becoming an enabler of foolish behavior...and that is distinctly *not* what I mean.
I must judge in what manner I wish to live my life. But my judgement is not to be directed at others with a bullhorn. It is well that I share wisdom with my brothers and sisters in an effort to spare them the pain and suffering that go with foolishness, but I must also realize at the same time that we all come to G-d in our own time and by our own ability. I too, am not always wise, occasionally I may act foolishly. Because of this, I have no room to point a finger or cast judgement at others. Yet, if I can spare another the heartache of foolishness, then I have saved a brother or sister from the error of their way. I cannot insist unless they are my charge, and even then it is a troubled road to travel (speaking of being too hard on teenagers, driving them to rebellion). Forgiveness and mercy says we will fall short, but I can still love you in spite of falling short, because I too fall short. As long as we are making any sincere effort, we needn't point fingers and create stumbling blocks for each other, we need to be there to help each other get back up off the ground and dust off when we fall. And we will fall.
According to scripture we arent to fellowship with non-believers...and we are to be equally yoked with one another... fellowship does not mean we arent to serve or counsel or share the gospel with.. its understanding what "fellowship" means.. that means opening up your home your heart and your soul.. we fellowship with the Lord.. we fellowship with the body of Christ..We witness to non-believers.
juantoo3
Well-Known Member
Kindest Regards, Faithful!
Jesus fellowshipped, to use your word and definition, with all manner of wayward people. And his witness was living as an example.
Something tells me that the verse(s) you mean at the beginning are referring to fellowshipping with people who are looking to cause trouble...rob a bank or blow up a building, pimp a collection of prostitutes or something like that.
I don't think it means not to fellowship with other people who are trying to get by like the vast majority, looking for the way back to our Heavenly Father.
I think I understand what you are saying. While I know it is common teaching, I look to the example that Jesus lived and I don't see it that way.
Jesus fellowshipped, to use your word and definition, with all manner of wayward people. And his witness was living as an example.
Something tells me that the verse(s) you mean at the beginning are referring to fellowshipping with people who are looking to cause trouble...rob a bank or blow up a building, pimp a collection of prostitutes or something like that.
I don't think it means not to fellowship with other people who are trying to get by like the vast majority, looking for the way back to our Heavenly Father.
S
Silas
Guest
Jesus never fellowshipped with sinners. There is a difference between fellowshipping and sitting or being around sinners. Jesus said, "what does light (Christians) have in common with darkness (nonChristians). We cannot be of unequal yolk. We can go where sinners are to tell them the glorious gospel which can save them if they repent and believe, but we dont fellowship with them.
juantoo3
Well-Known Member
Now you're just mincing words. Matthew was a publican. Paul was a Pharisee. Jesus walked among lepers and blind and otherwise infirm, he walked among the poor in purse and in spirit, he walked among those dregs of society the likes of you would shun. He did so every day of his ministry practically. He fed the hungry. He consoled the grieving. And he told the physicians to go heal themselves, because they were too "righteous" for him to be able to do anything with. Indeed, those same self-righteous hypocrits were the ones that conspired to put him to death.
Besides, if Jesus doesn't fellowship with sinners, then I guess you and me are in for a hot time in the old hell at some point, huh?
S
Silas
Guest
Again, there is a difference between fellowship and sitting with sinners to preach and to tend to them. Matthew was a publican and Paul was a Pharisee. Notice the past tense. Jesus never fellowshiped with the ungodly. Note Psa. 1. Jesus always did what is right in God's eyes.
By the strictest definition of the word, I'd have to agree with Faithfulservant.
I understand and agree with the spirit of what Juan is saying.
I don't think Jesus "fellowshipped" with unbelievers, now sinners - that's another story. Opening up your home? Yes. Soul? No.
I think this is the "spreading your pearls before swine" thing...
(not name-calling, just the text)
I understand and agree with the spirit of what Juan is saying.
I don't think Jesus "fellowshipped" with unbelievers, now sinners - that's another story. Opening up your home? Yes. Soul? No.
I think this is the "spreading your pearls before swine" thing...
(not name-calling, just the text)
juantoo3
Well-Known Member
Like, uh, yeah...they're both long dead, duh. That's why the past tense.
Yeah, so Jesus always did what is right in G-d's eyes, and he walked among the dregs of society...ergo, walking among the dregs of society is right in G-d's eyes!
I haven't at any time said anything about the ungodly. The closest would be the troublemakers I alluded to with Faithful. I agree, Jesus did not hang out with bank robbers planning their next heist. Did he sit with repentant thieves? I believe he did.
In fact, he died next to one.
C
cyberpi
Guest
By the way my post was not in reference to the OP. I was responding to some words that I saw in Will's post on unconditional Love, and to the title of the thread. If Love means doing for others as I would have them do for me, then I agree in unconditional love. If Love means doing for others what they desire, unconditionally... then NOT. Doing for others per their will is conditional and a rebuke is part of Love. I think it is common to see judgement and forgiveness as opposing, or judgement and love as opposing, so that is why I posted that verse.Kindest Regards, Cyberpi!
Let me begin by saying I am sorry for your unfortunate state of affairs, and I certainly hope for the best (as in "G-d's will") in the end.
There is a difference in applying blanket judgementalism towards other individuals in a bigoted way, and focusing on redressing a specific harm. We return again to the lesson of "turn the other cheek," and again I stress that is an Aramaic idiom that means "do not start a hateful thing with your neighbor, but if your neighbor starts a hateful thing with you then you have a right and obligation to nip it in the bud." Apples and oranges.
You have been specifically dealt with deceitfully (presuming what you have said is truthful, and I have no reason now to believe otherwise). The matter is not a matter of faith, nor an issue within a congregation (although that one can get a bit sticky). Yours is an issue of principle, with interest (
On blanket judgementalism, being judgemental, etc, if a person judges something that he does not see or experience, then is it really a judgement or is it just a fabrication made to suit that person's wishes? That is usually what I see. I submit that a judgement is a comparison between a situation seen and the model that a person has in their mind for what is true, loving, fair, righteous, etc... But if a person fabricates a judgement without any witness or measurement, then I consider it a fabrication... maybe not intentionally since a mind makes interpolations, extrapolations, and even false memories. While maybe not a valid judgement, the words usually still provide information for what the person thinks or wants to see.
So given that racism, ethnocentrism, xenophobia, homophobia, etc... involves judging millions of people that a person has never even met, I'm with you there. Generalizations and labels are ultimately extrapolations unless a person knows every person and has walked in the their shoes.
We "received" over two dozen "Gospels". The first Vatican counsil, narrowed them down to four, as officially part of the Bible. Paul never saw one Gospel, because there was not yet a New Testament. What Paul was talking about is the Word of Jesus, versus the words of others proclaiming to be the "savior". For example, Paul was dead before the Gospel of Luke was written, yet it was the first Gospel to be included into the New Testament.
You really should study up on your History of New Testament in construct...I think you might be amazed at what you found.
v/r
Joshua
S
Silas
Guest
juantoo
Like, uh, yeah...they're both long dead, duh. That's why the past tense.
Actually no, they arent dead. They're more alive than you.
Yeah, so Jesus always did what is right in G-d's eyes, and he walked among the dregs of society...ergo, walking among the dregs of society is right in G-d's eyes!
I haven't at any time said anything about the ungodly. The closest would be the troublemakers I alluded to with Faithful. I agree, Jesus did not hang out with bank robbers planning their next heist. Did he sit with repentant thieves? I believe he did.
Jesus sat with all kinds of sinners from the worst to the not so bad (in our eyes). All people before they are born again are sinners. Again, Jesus sat and spoke with sinners, telling them of the Kingdom of Heaven, etc. But, never did he fellowship with them. Fellowshipping is for family. Jesus said, "do not be of unequal yoke." Why do you think he would break his own law and be a liar?
Like, uh, yeah...they're both long dead, duh. That's why the past tense.
Actually no, they arent dead. They're more alive than you.
Yeah, so Jesus always did what is right in G-d's eyes, and he walked among the dregs of society...ergo, walking among the dregs of society is right in G-d's eyes!
I haven't at any time said anything about the ungodly. The closest would be the troublemakers I alluded to with Faithful. I agree, Jesus did not hang out with bank robbers planning their next heist. Did he sit with repentant thieves? I believe he did.
Jesus sat with all kinds of sinners from the worst to the not so bad (in our eyes). All people before they are born again are sinners. Again, Jesus sat and spoke with sinners, telling them of the Kingdom of Heaven, etc. But, never did he fellowship with them. Fellowshipping is for family. Jesus said, "do not be of unequal yoke." Why do you think he would break his own law and be a liar?
S