What is Love?

Discussion in 'General Discussions' started by Joshuastone7, Feb 13, 2024.

  1. 4,459
    837
    113
    Joshuastone7

    Joshuastone7 Administrator Staff Member

    Joined:
    Jan 26, 2013
    Messages:
    4,459
    Likes Received:
    837
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    Love is an action, not a feeling, for we can show love whether we feel it or not. I contend that our internal feelings are meaningless and merely an illusion. Hear me out...

    Internal feelings of love can not be measured nor be made known to others. It's like asking what a half of a hole is. Can you prove you love someone more than they love you? Therefore, we can only ever show love by actions and words. This means our intentions are always irrelevant. Our actions are all that matters to the outside world. Why we did or didn't do something is meaningless. If we treat someone unfairly, there is no excuse.

    No one can ever make us feel anything. No one ever made you feel any way you did. That's impossible. However, we should let others' actions and words affect how we act toward them. We should allow their actions, not their intentions, to mold our opinions of them. A man can't beat his wife every day and get to say it's not her it's him, and he didn't intend to hurt her. And vice versa, women use gossip, hurtful words and innuendos as punches.

    Our feelings are not our responsibility; they are our partner's responsibility. A partner's responsibility is remembering the actions and words needed to care for the other's wishes and desires, and then do them.

    So, is that a contradiction to my statement that feelings are meaningless? I don't think so. We can only ever share with others the knowledge of actions we need from them. We are not sharing our internal emotions. That's impossible. Internal feelings are not measurable. Can you share with someone how much they hurt you? No, that also is impossible. Therefore, if it can't be measured, it does not exist. Feelings are illusionary.

    Why is it not okay to look out for our own feelings first? Because all we are doing is being selfish. Plain and simple. We would simply be looking out for ourselves first; the intentions and feelings behind it are meaningless.

    So, if others mistreat us, they don't make us feel the way we do; we allow their actions and words to affect our opinions of them and future actions toward them. The only thing we can do is tell them their actions and words are disrespectful and selfish, or leave. We can only do us.

    Love is an action that only exists in the physical world.

    "Let us not love in word or in tongue, but in deed and in truth” 1Jhn 3:18

    "Do unto others as you would have them do unto you." Mth 7:12

    "What do you think? A man had two sons. And he went to the first and said, ‘Son, go and work in the vineyard today.’ And he answered, ‘I will not,’ but afterward he changed his mind and went. And he went to the other son and said the same. And he answered, ‘I go, sir,’ but did not go. Which of the two did the will of his father?” Mth 21:28-31

    Joshua
     
  2. 159
    41
    28
    Timothy Kline

    Timothy Kline Member

    Joined:
    Jan 16, 2021
    Messages:
    159
    Likes Received:
    41
    Trophy Points:
    28
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    Perry, MI
    Christian greetings and great to see recent posts from you, brother!

    I am planning to respond to this thread but in the interim, can you flesh out (elaborate) what you wrote above? I am wanting to better ensure that I am understanding the thoughts in your topic starter before I put my foot in my mouth as I tend to do sometimes. :)

    --Timothy
     
  3. 159
    41
    28
    Timothy Kline

    Timothy Kline Member

    Joined:
    Jan 16, 2021
    Messages:
    159
    Likes Received:
    41
    Trophy Points:
    28
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    Perry, MI
    Christian greetings, brother,

    I have to get the laundry going, but in addition to the clarification I'm looking forward to, here's some off-the-cuff remarks I'll throw on the table briefly-- cause the laundry ain't going nowhere. o_O

    I disagree here, and here's why:

    First, ask a young child about something they really, really like (they "LOVE" such-and-such, in their innocent perception and reason) and have them show you just how much they "love" whatever they had shared with you. Likely, that child's hands will stretch out as far as they can reach, and may even add "and more" or something similar, right? They are attempting, within their present abilities to convey, how consuming this emotion is. The child's mother, for example, is an object of a child's feelings of love, right? And the child is communicating their estimation of that feeling's affect on them, loving that object.

    Now, I've read papers and books during the course of my life that ascribe this so-called "love" to the child's natural need for provisioned shelter and food until said child reaches a level of maturity where the child can provide for those needs separate from the parents. Basically, natural dependency so that the species can continue. Sounds reasonable to me if one's trying to dispense with Creation and a Creator. /shrug

    But I digress.

    Add to that, Song of Solomon, which would not even exist were it not for written words attempting to capture and convey the feelings in the account. On some level, the words touch us, especially those among us who have experienced such love. Connects with us in a way that others themselves have never experienced.

    When Adam encountered the woman whom our Creator made for him, his words expressed the internal feelings he was experiencing. I'll add, jokingly, that it was love at first sight-- which was a good thing because there were no other options... Adam had already explored 'em. He was even blessed by his Creator to name her. It wasn't like she came up to him and introduced herself, "Hey, I'm Eve. What's your name?" as Adam stood there dumbfounded and bedazzled in her beauty. It was more like, "Hi! I'm Adam, and your name's Eve."

    I agree with this in principle.

    However, I'm also considering this:

    "You have heard that it was said, ‘Do not commit adultery.’ But I tell you that anyone who looks at a woman to lust after her has already committed adultery with her in his heart." —Matthew 5:27-28 BSB

    Under the Law of Moses, one would be punished for the transgression of adultery. Under the Law of Christ, if one even dwells on such thoughts, there is found no distinction from acting out on said sin. The world around us argues that if one is condemned for thinking such thoughts, then one might as well commit the adulterous act as well.

    We, as believers, on the other hand, are commanded otherwise:

    Above all else, guard your heart, for everything you do flows from it. —Proverbs 4:23, NIV

    Put to death therefore what is earthly in you: sexual immorality, impurity, passion, evil desire, and covetousness, which is idolatry. —Colossians 3:5, ESV

    Again, there are none to be found here which a man cannot love yet not act out upon, as Jesus noted with the example of adulterous thoughts.

    This would seem to me to disagree with what you wrote:

    While "our actions are all that matters to the outside world," God is far more interested in the things going on within us that the outside world doesn't see. Even thoughts one hasn't "actioned" for all the world to see.

    For whenever our heart condemns us, God is greater than our heart, and he knows everything. —1 John 3:20, ESV

    Finally:

    “I the Lord search the heart and test the mind, to give every man according to his ways, according to the fruit of his deeds.” —Jeremiah 17:10, ESV

    If this translation / rendering holds up, I am left with the impression that our Creator will be considering intentions when He "gives every man... according to the fruit of his [actions]."

    An extreme example, I know, but what about the mentally challenged and handicapped prone to violent outbursts yet capable of love. They certainly do not intend to cause damage and harm around them, do they? (OK, some do, but: again, intention). And such ones are capable, are they not, of demonstrating acts of love in their lucidity?

    Ugh, the clock insists on its relentless course, so I need to wrap this one up.

    ...More to follow...

    Submitted for your perusal and consideration,
    a believer named Timothy
     
  4. 4,459
    837
    113
    Joshuastone7

    Joshuastone7 Administrator Staff Member

    Joined:
    Jan 26, 2013
    Messages:
    4,459
    Likes Received:
    837
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    Greetings brother,

    Does that child feel more love than another child for the same subject? How could that be measured? So, the child holds out their hands; does that tell us just how much the child feels for something? They could be repeating what they had seen other children do when describing feelings. Or they could just be expressing themselves in the only way they know how.

    However, the final aspect of the matter is that feelings cannot be measured against anything or anyone. The only way we even know the child has a feeling is because of their action, that of the words and arm movements. What if the child did not share the words or the arm movements? Is the outside world aware of those feelings? So then, what matters?

    Again, it is by action that love is conveyed to you. If it were not for the written words from Solomon, you would have no idea what his understanding of love was, correct? The only thing, therefore, that exists is the words, not his internal feelings. Had he said nothing, his internal feelings wouldn't even exist today. They also would not have existed to anyone else in his day had he not expressed them in the written word, a form of action.

    Hence, our internal feelings are irrelevant to the outside world, and only our actions matter.

    Think about the story of the good shepherd from Luke. Does it not show that intent and feelings are meaningless and that only our actions matter? That is the very definition of the story.

    Keep in mind, brother, that people can act contrary to their internal feelings. Regardless of Adam's internal feelings, his actions were all that mattered. In the parable of the two sons, their intent was irrelevant; only their actions mattered.

    What if you don't like a gift from someone, but you act as though you do? What are you conveying to them? You are presenting actions contrary to your internal feelings. Can anyone read your mind? No, the only thing anyone has to go on is your actions. So in such a case you are making your internal feelings irrelevant.

    Is not the prolonged look a physical action? Let's say that person does not continue to look at a woman but closes their eyes and imagines that woman in their mind. Is that also sinning in their heart?

    Should we not see our Lord's words as simply a warning? One does not commit adultery unless one has physically. Therefore, the warning is the prolonged looks are acting out the action in their mind that leads to sin in the real world. One won't commit the physical sin unless the thoughts take over internally.

    Is not Jesus' words simply a warning, not a lesson in sin being simply a thought? What are we judged on? Is it not deeds?

    I am not so sure about that. Are thoughts sin, or are actions?

    "For out of the heart come evil thoughts, murder, adultery, sexual immorality, theft, false witness, slander." Mth 15:19

    Can one completely purge evil thoughts from the mind? It would appear to me that the only thing that will matter at the end of the age are deeds.

    "God "will repay each one according to his deeds." Rom 2:6

    Now, according to our Lord, if we allow our hearts to dwell on evil, our actions will be evil. Is that not the jist of His teachings? I can not believe we would be judged according to looking at women at some point in our lives. I do not believe there is a departure from the Old Testament on infidelity, but rather a more nuanced warning so that evil thoughts may not lead to physical sin.

    Again, what matters in this scripture? Is it not what is done?

    Unless I am mistaken, you are saying if a man has any of these thoughts or feelings, they have already committed the sin itself. I would have to disagree. It seems to me our Lord is telling us that these thoughts lead to sin. We are capable of having these thoughts without committing the sin. Obviously, I am not saying it is OK to dwell on them because that can lead to acting upon them. And that seems to be the reason our Lord admonishes us to purge our minds of these thoughts. Is it not our Lord's intent to say we shouldn't even start thinking about such things?

    Regardless, are we not judged by deeds?

    I would completely disagree with this brother. In the parable of the two sons, intentions were irrelevant. All that mattered were deeds. If a man went against his natural instinct to not get involved but does good anyway, how much more so does that show love than one who has already acted out of the feelings of love? Is this not the very nature of love taught all throughout Scripture? Of what good is it if we do good to those we love? Is not a more perfected love to do good to those whom we do not love? Is this not the meaning intended by God? (Luk 6:32-36)

    One can show love to those they already feel love for, or they can also show love to those they do not have internal feelings of love. Is this not what is meant by our hearts being searched? Is this not what matters most to JHVH, that we show love regardless of our heart condition?

    Those with, let's say, Down syndrome, are they not still responsible for their actions? A parent of such children still scolds them and corrects them, not allowing their ailment to be an excuse for their actions. Do alcoholics get to blame their actions on their disease? Does an abuser get to blame their actions on their own internal demons? Everyone on this planet is responsible for their actions, regardless of their shortcomings, and regardless of their intent. How many people hurt others and never intended to? Does it matter that they did not intend to?

    All courts care about are actions, just like everyone else in any relationship on this planet. Can others read our minds, or are our actions the only thing they can go off of? Regardless of our feelings or intentions, our actions are all that matter. Hence why, intentions are irrelevant. One can show love or not, irrespective of our internal feelings.

    It is still my contention that intent is irrelevant; only actions matter.

    "But each person is tempted when he is lured and enticed by his own desire. Then desire when it has conceived gives birth to sin, and sin when it is fully grown brings forth death." Jam 1:14,15

    All love, brother...
     
  5. 159
    41
    28
    Timothy Kline

    Timothy Kline Member

    Joined:
    Jan 16, 2021
    Messages:
    159
    Likes Received:
    41
    Trophy Points:
    28
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    Perry, MI
    I had to chuckle, because I have known kids who would tell you that they, in fact, DO feel more love than another child for the same subject. Because from their perspective (an infantile and self-centered perspective, admittedly because empathy hasn't been developed) they do.

    Empathy, as you know, is having the capacity to put one's self in another's perspective, position, or situation so as to feel what they are feeling or experiencing by putting ourselves in that person's place; fellow-feeling. And if we ourselves have already been in that person's place, and experienced what this person is now experiencing, or now has as far as perspective, et al.

    I've come to appreciate that compassion is always looking for opportunity and empathy is the trigger, of course. By way of example, Jesus' compassion throughout his ministry to the first-century Jews, and even Gentiles, is a matter of scriptural record.

    So please allow a question:

    Who has more compassion for a leper? Someone who's never had leprosy but can imagine how it must be, or a person who HAS had leprosy and has experienced the relief in recovery from it?

    Both the person who has never personally experienced leprosy and the one who has had leprosy demonstrate similar outward acts other humans would perceive as associated with compassion. Which of the two is, in fact, more compassionate than the other?

    Mind you, compassion has its place. After all, it is not given to us to know another's heart. The Bible warns us that the heart is treacherous and asks the rhetorical question "and who can know it?"

    I'll go on record here and admit that while I love my wife dearly, there are times when my actions or words sure don't demonstrate the love I declare for my wife. And apart from the bottom line that I may love my wife as much as life itself, I am, at my heart, a sinful creature with an inherited fallen nature. I have said some of the stupidest and most hurtful things to this woman whom I tell others without hesitation is my beloved. Love certainly wasn't working acts an observer would recognize as love.

    Yet there it is. If I love my wife, why speak in such a way to her? Is it not because of the "war in my members," the conflict between my fallen self and the redemptive process I am being brought through before receiving my inheritance?

    My point here, I think, is that just as feelings— including love— are not unfailingly reliable, neither do actions unfailingly and reliably reflect the feelings "behind the scenes," as it were.

    We're both fathers, so we both know that an infant can both convey what they are feeling and to what extent they are feeling. LOL

    Having said that, I am in agreement with you that the "outside world" has no awareness of any feeling, even love, that we may be experiencing unless we have an avenue by which to communicate that inner experience as we are able. You've mentioned actions and words, and I am in agreement with you here, as well.

    Even our facial expression can convey volumes! As a father, I love my sons, but my look of disapproval at diverse times— while the "outside world" would perceive anger rather than love... was fostered by love. It was not a look of disapproval, per se, or anger-- but out of love was a look of expression of loving concern, even an injured love on some occasions as they moved through adolescence and into their own adult stage of living.

    Yes, there was action (the expression), but did it communicate love as perceived by my son? In other words, my son has to interpret this as sourced in love and concern, and not just as anger and frustration-- or just not liking what-ever. And that is going to depend on his own heart, surely. And although I also communicated with words (action) as moved by my love for them, it still fell to them to perceive the love behind the words, and that depended on their own heart... and ideally act in such a way that demonstrated that they perceived my facial expressions and words in the way I was motivated to convey.

    Again, as far as the outside world, I agree that feelings are "irrelevant" in the outside world's estimation, and, arguably, our own since we are inherently inclined toward self. Sayings such as "actions speak louder than words" and "prove it" are still common phrases in the outside world that can only judge a man by "outward appearance." (John 7:24).

    Our actions matter, agreed. Specifically, as far as the outside world, which can only judge us on observable data.

    But our Father is far more interested in what's going on behind the actions. The heart behind the actions. The inclination of that heart. And not only that, He consistently counsels us to try to understand our heart, and its inclinations. To be aware of them and grow in discernment between inherited-natural inclination and spiritual inclination. (2 Corinthians 13:5; Romans 7:23).

    Jesus likewise addresses the feelings and intentions in relation to what is demonstrated to the outside world:

    Woe to you, scribes and Pharisees, you hypocrites! You clean the outside of the cup and dish, but inside they are full of greed and self-indulgence. Blind Pharisee! First clean the inside of the cup and dish, so that the outside may become clean as well. —John 7:25-26 BSB

    And there are other accounts that can be pointed to, as well.

    Are intent and feelings meaningless? To the outside, fallen world? Sure. But to our Father, these are the wellsprings from which all action flows. (Matthew 7:17-23)

    No dispute from me that people can act contrary to their feelings. And that's been mentioned by both of us.

    But was it only Adam's actions that mattered?

    Again, I am of the perspective that his actions only manifested what was already at work in his heart. After all, our Creator is teaching us to benefit ourselves. (Isaiah 48:17) As believers, we have been undeservedly given a spiritual awareness of the fallen nature at work within us. In Adam's case, his inaction as Eve was exchanging conversation with the Tempter speaks as loudly as would have any action he could have taken, does it not?

    Gotta close again, sorry. Life, chores, and all that stuff.

    Submitted for your perusal and consideration,
    Timothy
     
  6. 159
    41
    28
    Timothy Kline

    Timothy Kline Member

    Joined:
    Jan 16, 2021
    Messages:
    159
    Likes Received:
    41
    Trophy Points:
    28
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    Perry, MI
    I have a few more minutes here, and thought I'd spend them responding, off-the-cuff-sorry! --because I'm on the clock with the home domestics before it's back to the grind tomorrow... but anyhow. . .

    "Is it not deeds {that we are judged on?}"

    Sure, if we were still living under the Law of Moses.

    But we aren't, are we?

    As Christians, we've been given understanding into the foundation of the Law of Moses. The curtain is pulled back and behind that panorama of laws governing every aspect of life and where animals died in the stead of the sinner, that offender against Jehovah God Himself— we are shown that the heart of the problem is Man's heart.

    And no law can overturn that quagmire. It can only be replaced, and that's where the Law of Christ takes us to the next level of understanding the process He is bringing us through as He teaches us to benefit ourselves. It plows the hardened soil of our heart, overturns deeply-rooted things that the Law of Moses would never have resolved-- and couldn't, so long as animals kept having to die in the stead of the sinner.

    That's changed.

    If we deliberately go on sinning after we have received the knowledge of the truth, no further sacrifice for sins remains, but only a fearful expectation of judgment and of raging fire that will consume all adversaries. —Hebrews 10:26-27 BSB

    "...no further sacrifice for sins remains..." is a game-changer because under the Law of Moses, one offered their sin sacrifice and went about their day and life, good or bad.

    No repentance necessary, mind you.

    Yes, the outworking of sin is externally observable through action (and consequences thereof) but the heart of the matter, pardon the pun, is the heart.

    That is to say, brother, I believe that the Law of Christ takes us behind the curtains, as I mentioned above, and provides us with an internally observable perspective of our fallen self.

    I do not need to enter into an adulterous relationship in order to transgress, under the Law of Christ. Dwelling or even entertaining thoughts on such matters in the privacy of one's own mind is just as an affront to our Holy God as acting on those thoughts is. Worse, because of the in-dwelling of holy spirit as God is with us by means of the Helper in the same temple of our body.

    I've come to be convinced that thoughts have latent power. Everything we know as Creation was first conceived by Him and then Spoken into existence. Just as thoughts have power, so do words-- but rather than digress on that one... best to get back on-topic here.

    But each one is tempted when by his own evil desires he is lured away and enticed. Then after desire has conceived, it gives birth to sin; and sin, when it is full-grown, gives birth to death. —James 1:14-15 BSB

    So, no, I would disagree that we're judged on deeds but get a free ride if we only dwelled on such things, if that's what you were asking as far as deeds (above).

    {More to follow}

    --Timothy
     
  7. 159
    41
    28
    Timothy Kline

    Timothy Kline Member

    Joined:
    Jan 16, 2021
    Messages:
    159
    Likes Received:
    41
    Trophy Points:
    28
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    Perry, MI
    {[Placeholder]}

    Genesis 4:7; James 1:14-15

    {Note to myself: Two scriptures that came to mind too late last evening to do much more than hope I could remember until morning so I could write them down for this discussion, but they seemed pertinent to some of this topic. No time this morning to do more than insert them in a placeholder post.}
     
  8. 4,459
    837
    113
    Joshuastone7

    Joshuastone7 Administrator Staff Member

    Joined:
    Jan 26, 2013
    Messages:
    4,459
    Likes Received:
    837
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    It's interesting that, indeed, I have had a gift, or in fact, the curse of great empathy from a very early age. However, as you probably know, most of that insight comes from reading outward actions from others. Empaths are very good at reading people, meaning their outward actions. We tend to match others' emotions.

    I would say there is no answer to this question. One who has had leprosy could very well have less empathy than one without. One doesn't need to have a disease to have empathy. And there is no way to judge who has more empathy than another.

    Remember, the men of God walked past the injured Jew, yet the Samaritan stopped and helped. I don't believe your example can have an answer. It all depends on the one who acts.

    And so, one might ask, what is most important? What matters?

    Were your sons born with the instinct to understand the meaning behind your looks, or does it come from years of you telling them what it meant, to the point of eventually not needing to say a word?

    Agreed...

    This is where I'm not so sure I agree with you. I haven't found a reason to believe so yet.

    It seems to me our Lord is interested in our heart condition only to the point of action. From our hearts come our actions. The story of the two sons tells me that, ultimately, our actions are far more critical than our intentions. Does He not teach us that out of our hearts come our actions? Meaning the actions weight the matter.

    "For out of the heart come evil thoughts, murder, adultery, sexual immorality, theft, false witness, slander." Mth 15:19

    Again, I see in our Lord's words that the Pharisees' actions are from their heart condition. The main point of our Lord is that they needed to repair their internal heart condition to fix the exterior. What mattered most? It wasn't the actions for the sake of the thoughts. The most important thing to our Lord in this passage is their actions.

    I say yes. Only Adam's actions mattered. Had Eve considered the snake's suggestion but not acted, she would not have been punished. Had Adam considered eating but had not, he would not have died. That literally is the story of the two sons.

    You are saying that once the snake opened its mouth, Adam and Eve had no choice but to sin. What you are saying is the snake knew they would sin. I'm afraid I have to disagree...

    What you are saying here is that Adam had no free will. I know you believe the creator knew Adam's sin previously, whereas I believe it was a pre-Jesus or Michael who created Adam and did not know he would sin.

    Regardless, saying Adam sinned because he considered it means he had no free will. You would be saying that the only way he would not have sinned is to have never considered eating the fruit at all. Again, what you are saying is the snake knew they would sin simply by suggesting it. That seems rather unfair to me.

    Another way to look at this is this: After Eve sinned, she offered the fruit to Adam. He had no choice but to consider to eat it or not. What you are saying is at that point, he had no choice but to eat it because he thought about doing it. I would say he still had free will, and only his actions mattered. Who's to say either had never considered eating from the tree previously? How do you not think about eating from it when God tells you not to? In order to obey the rule of not eating from it, you have to consider eating from it or not.

    The command was to not eat from the tree. The command wasn't to never consider it.

    I don't think so; the only thing he can do is him. He couldn't make her do or not do anything. Again, I would see the consideration of the events as irrelevant to the actions. I still see that only the actions mattered. Otherwise, they would have had no free will. And to me, that means they were not life but only a pre-recorded record.

    The only ones I believe are foreseen are the co-rulers with Christ. And that was after the fall of Adam and Eve.

    Our Lord fulfilled the Old Covenant, but is not all Scripture beneficial? Regardless, the NT tells us we are judged by actions alone.

    "And if you call on him as Father who judges impartially according to each one’s deeds, conduct yourselves with fear throughout the time of your exile." 1Pt 1:17

    "Their work will be shown for what it is, because the Day will bring it to light. It will be revealed with fire, and the fire will test the quality of each person’s work." 1Cor 3:13

    "And I saw the dead, great and small, standing before the throne, and books were opened. Another book was opened, which is the book of life. The dead were judged according to what they had done as recorded in the books." Rev 20:12

    I would say the heart condition only matters as it pertains to our actions. Again, we can have no intention of helping anyone, yet if we do, we are more righteous than someone who intends to but does not. That is the story of the two sons. Our heart only matters as it pertains to our actions. If we do not act at all, our heart condition is irrelevant. If we act out of love even though we don't feel it, we are shown to be righteous. The reason God tells us to have the right heart condition is to affect our actions.

    I disagree here. I see no difference. Under the Old Testament and the New, the sacrifice only works if we stop sinning. If we do not stop sinning, neither benefit us. All of Hebrew history tells us this. They could not just sacrifice and continue to sin without repercussions.

    Again, the heart only matters as to the actions. If we can act good regardless of our heart, the heart is secondary. Our Lord told us to clean the inside first because out of our hearts comes actions. We must adjust our inside to act correctly. When someone doesn't want to help but still does, that is still coming from the heart. They are choosing to show love.

    And this is where we disagree. I only believe our Lord told us that thoughts are adultery in the heart so that we don't make them in real life. The thoughts can lead to the action. He doesn't say thinking of other women is a sin with Him; He's saying it's a sin within our own hearts. We are committing the sin in our minds, not in the real world. Out of the hearts come actions. If we allow our hearts to dwell on such things, it can lead to real sin, not just in our hearts and minds.

    I do not believe our Lord is saying that committing adultery in our hearts is just as much a sin as if we committed adultery in real life.

    That is obviously our separation on this subject. I am not condoning or saying it is okay to think sinful thoughts. Our Lord told us not to, but what I am saying is that it's going too far by calling thought sins as grave as actionable sins. That is what the Scribes and Pharisees were doing; they took the law too far. I say we are not judged on our thoughts but on our actions alone.

    Greetings, dear brother...

    Joshua
     
  9. 159
    41
    28
    Timothy Kline

    Timothy Kline Member

    Joined:
    Jan 16, 2021
    Messages:
    159
    Likes Received:
    41
    Trophy Points:
    28
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    Perry, MI

    For the sake of open disclosure, I have yet to read the remainder of your response-- and will do so still, but want to type this out before I forget what I want to say here.

    Maybe this is one of those Arian/Athanasius-type subjects, but this might help me:

    In the fourteenth chapter of Isaiah is found:

    How you have fallen from heaven,
    O day star, son of the dawn!
    You have been cut down to the ground,
    O destroyer of nations. You said in your heart:
    “I will ascend to the heavens;
    I will raise my throne
    above the stars of God.
    I will sit on the mount of assembly,
    in the far reaches of the north.
    I will ascend above the tops of the clouds;
    I will make myself like the Most High.”
    — Isaiah 14:12-14 BSB

    For many/most believers, this is a reference to the angel behind what went down in Eden. Satan, for most believers out there. But whether it is, or another, isn't necessarily pertinent to my reservations in the perspective you're offering as far as sin not being sin until there is action of some sort.

    Isaiah is inspired to record what he couldn't otherwise have known: what the "son of the dawn" was thinking. But God knew, just as He knows the secret person of our own heart, right? And it is these thoughts the "son of the dawn" was having which lead to trouble. No good can come of this whole "I will" do this and "I will" do that stuff. Jesus made it clear: "not MY will but God's Will." That's the goal as we bring every thought into subjection. (2 Corinthians 10:5)

    But not because those thoughts we need to bring into subjection lead to sin-- but because such thoughts are sin as far as putting on the obedience of Jesus Christ, that he exemplified. Not my will, but the Will of Him Who sent me.

    Actions borne of sinful, self-wilful thoughts are seen by others, sure. But it's merely the external manifestation of what was already there for God Himself to see. Setting aside God's Will for one's own is sin. Doesn't matter at that point what comes of it, as a Christian living by the Law of the Christ. If there's any action to be carried out here, it's bringing such thought(s) into captivity, with God placing the responsibility at our feet-- although not without a Helper from our Father.

    Sorry for the brevity, and I do still need to read the remainder of your post, but this is where I'm not understanding your perspective, especially.

    Submitted for your perusal and consideration,
    Timothy, a believer
     
  10. 4,459
    837
    113
    Joshuastone7

    Joshuastone7 Administrator Staff Member

    Joined:
    Jan 26, 2013
    Messages:
    4,459
    Likes Received:
    837
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    Greetings brother,

    I didn't really clarify my position on our Lord's words here in John. So, let me address it further.

    I do not believe Jesus was saying the Pharisees' actions were righteous by saying they kept the outside of the cup clean. As you know, we must take all of His words as a whole.

    On many occasions, He had criticized the Scribes and Pharisees for their whitewashed outward appearance and said their actions were, indeed, grievous and sinful.

    "The scribes and the Pharisees sit on Moses’ seat, so do and observe whatever they tell you, but not the works they do. For they preach, but do not practice." Mth 23:2

    "They tie up heavy burdens, hard to bear, and lay them on people’s shoulders, but they themselves are not willing to move them with their finger." Mth 23:4

    "Woe to you, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites! For you are like whitewashed tombs, which outwardly appear beautiful, but within are full of dead people’s bones and all uncleanness." Mth 23:27

    “But woe to you Pharisees! For you tithe mint and rue and every herb, and neglect justice and the love of God. These you ought to have done, without neglecting the others. Woe to you Pharisees! For you love the best seat in the synagogues and greetings in the marketplaces. Woe to you! For you are like unmarked graves, and people walk over them without knowing it.” Luk 11:42-44

    "Therefore I send you prophets and wise men and scribes, some of whom you will kill and crucify, and some you will flog in your synagogues and persecute from town to town." Mth 23:34

    Our Lord was saying in the scriptures you quoted that the Pharisees kept the appearance of the cup's exterior clean by only focusing on what other people saw of them, a false outward appearance of piety. Jesus wasn't saying the outside of the cup was actually clean, or in other words, that their actions were righteous. His words, on many occasions, clearly tell us that. We must take His words as a whole.

    Again, in the scriptures you quoted, Jesus reiterated their false outward piety and inward heart condition that was causing their actions to be sinful. The subject of our Lord's words remained focused on their actions.

    All love...

    Joshua
     
  11. 725
    50
    28
    Jan

    Jan Active Member

    Joined:
    Aug 7, 2014
    Messages:
    725
    Likes Received:
    50
    Trophy Points:
    28
    Hi Joshua and you all. About two weeks ago I wrote a letter to the Writing Committee of the WT about what love, agape is because at this time the circuit oversees have a talk about what agape is and about the importance of love. I happened to visit congregations in two different circuits and hear this same talk from two different circuit oversees. But unfortunately the WT organization and other Bible commentators don't understand what love, especially agape is. So I tried to explain it to them in a letter. Also why they still have not understood it. So here is what I wrote them:

    February 17, 2024


    Hello Brothers in the writing committee,


    I have remarked that there is a need to get a more correct understanding of love, agape.

    This is evident from the fact that Anglo-Saxon and Nordic Germanic peoples are often perceived as cold people. And unfortunately the Governing body consists almost exclusively from brothers of Anglo-Saxon origin.

    I have also been among Latinos, French and Slavic and Finns and I have experienced warmth much more among them than among Anglo-Saxons.

    I don’t mean that Angol-Saxons are worse as people than the rest. But there are things Anglo-Saxons are oblivious about. But there are also good qualities in which Anglo-Saxons usually exceed, namely following rules. Anglo-Saxons are usually not so emotional and that is why it is easier for them to follow rules. Anglo-Saxons are therefore more “robotic” if you allow me to use this term.

    Following rules is directly related to righteousness. So that is a good thing, if the rules are from the Bible.

    But that is not enough for salvation, because if there is no love, righteousness is worth nothing.

    That is what apostle Paul tried to point out:


    1 Corinthians 13:1 If I speak in the tongues of men and of angels but do not have love, I have become a clanging gong or a clashing cymbal. 2 And if I have the gift of prophecy and understand all the sacred secrets and all knowledge, and if I have all the faith so as to move mountains, but do not have love, I am nothing. 3 And if I give all my belongings to feed others, and if I hand over my body so that I may boast, but do not have love, I do not benefit at all.


    Also Jesus Christ was clear about that:


    Revelation 2:2 I know your deeds, and your labor and endurance, and that you cannot tolerate bad men, and that you put to the test those who say they are apostles, but they are not, and you found them to be liars. 3 You are also showing endurance, and you have persevered for the sake of my name and have not grown weary. 4 Nevertheless, I hold this against you, that you have left the love you had at first. 5 “‘Therefore remember from where you have fallen, and repent and do the deeds you did at first. If you do not, I will come to you, and I will remove your lampstand from its place, unless you repent.


    I think Latinos, French, Slavs, Greeks and Finns in the world know what love is. But unfortunately Anglo-Saxons have misunderstood what love, agape is, because of their lack of this kind of love. And that is likely the reason why biblical dictionaries created by Anglo-Saxons have failed to get a true and right definition of what agape is.

    These dictionaries claim that agape can be without warmth, like politeness and avoidance to disturb or just to fill someone’s needs.

    But what do the scriptures reveal about what is agape really?

    We have to find all the scriptures where agape is used and see the context.

    The Greek Septuagint is especially good, because it reveals how agape was used in the daily language.

    The scriptures reveal that love, agape, is always a warm feeling. Whereas righteousness differs from love, because righteousness is not based on a warm feeling toward anything, but instead a compulsive feeling to do what is right.

    Agape love is in fact the feeling to like some one or some thing.

    And we all know what it is to like something.


    Maybe people who are unable to like their enemies feel that they have to find an alternative definition to love, because Jesus commanded us to love one’s enemies, in order to get an excuse and justification not to love or like one’s enemies.


    But there are examples in the Bible about real love for enemies, or adversaries. Jesus himself being an example of that. Here an example:


    Luke 22:50 One of them even struck the slave of the high priest, taking off his right ear. 51 But in reply Jesus said: “That is enough.” And he touched the ear and healed him.


    Luke 23:33 And when they got to the place called Skull, they nailed him to the stake there alongside the criminals, one on his right and one on his left.

    34 But Jesus was saying: “Father, forgive them, for they do not know what they are doing.” Furthermore, they cast lots to distribute his garments.


    Another example is Stephen in Acts 7:59 As they were stoning Stephen, he made this appeal: “Lord Jesus, receive my spirit.” 60 Then, kneeling down, he cried out with a strong voice: “Jehovah, do not charge this sin against them.” And after saying this, he fell asleep in death.


    That is what a warm feeling, true love, agape toward adversaries makes possible.

    When a Christian has such a warm feeling toward adversaries, he or she can stay hopeful of a potential change of attitude in one's enemies. Because we have no right to judge, so we must hope for the best about our enemies until Jesus judges them.


    David is also a good example in what really is love, agape for one’s enemies.


    For example after Saul died David expressed his deep love he had for him, despite the fact that Saul was his enemy.


    2 Samuel 1:21 You mountains of Gil·boʹa,

    May there be no dew or rain upon you,

    Nor fields producing holy contributions,

    Because there the shield of mighty ones was defiled,

    The shield of Saul is no longer anointed with oil.

    22 From the blood of the slain, from the fat of mighty ones,

    The bow of Jonʹa·than did not turn back,

    And the sword of Saul would not return without success.

    23 Saul and Jonʹa·than, beloved and cherished during their life,

    And in death they were not separated.

    Swifter than the eagles they were,

    Mightier than the lions.

    24 O daughters of Israel, weep over Saul,

    Who clothed you in scarlet and finery,

    Who put gold ornaments upon your clothing.



    I googled and found a compilation of scriptures with agape in the Hebrew scriptures in the Greek Septuagint, please take a look:


    https://loveofgodproject.org/2013/02/agape-septuagint-verses/


    And scriptures with agape in the Christian Greek Scriptures


    https://loveofgodproject.org/2013/02/agape-new-testament-verses/


    So, because love is a warm feeling when we like something or someone, we might ask, what chemical substance is giving this warm feeling of pleasure. Scientists have found that it is a molecule called oxytocin that causes the feeling of love in humans and animals.


    When we inadvertently or intentionally cause a release of this love-substance we become loving in many ways as described by apostle Paul in 1 Corinthians 13.

    When we are under the influence of love, the substance called oxytocin, we become automatically in accord with what love is:


    4 Love is patient and kind. Love is not jealous. It does not brag, does not get puffed up, 5 does not behave indecently, does not look for its own interests, does not become provoked. It does not keep account of the injury. 6 It does not rejoice over unrighteousness, but rejoices with the truth. 7 It bears all things, believes all things, hopes all things, endures all things.


    So we don’t even need to constantly analyze how to behave, instead we need to feel love and a good attitude toward others will follow automatically.


    2 Timothy 2:22 So flee from youthful desires, but pursue righteousness, faith, love, peace, along with those who call on the Lord out of a clean heart.


    1 Corinthians 16:14 Let everything you do be done with love.



    With brotherly love Jan Kosonen
     
  12. 4,459
    837
    113
    Joshuastone7

    Joshuastone7 Administrator Staff Member

    Joined:
    Jan 26, 2013
    Messages:
    4,459
    Likes Received:
    837
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    Curious... What about the people who do not perceive Anglo-Saxon and Nordic Germanic people as cold? Also, who are these Anglo-Saxon and Nordic Germanic people today?

    I am curious why you choose to single out an ideology based on stereotyping a regional group of people. Some may think a group of people are cold, while others do not. Usually, Christians wouldn't group people into regional or skin color groups and then stereotype them. Besides, Anglo-Saxons generally no longer exist. Who chooses who is part of what so-called group?

    I'm sorry, but the Nazis applied this same ideology of eugenics that you are asserting here.

    And if you consider Anglo-Saxon today represents an ideology, one must understand everyone has their own opinions. If someone disagrees with you on a certain subject, does that mean everyone holding such views has no understanding of love?

    Do Governing Body members consider themselves as Anglo-Saxon? I do not believe so. Then, can I assume you mean they are white English speaking men whose families come from a certain location you deem Anglo-Saxon? If that is the case, does that mean you believe that white men whose genetics come from such places, in general, would not be able to have a complete understanding of love?

    Just because past family members lived in such and such places, held certain views, and spoke a certain language, that means their children will as well? Then why aren't there still Nazis in Germany? All those Nazis had children, you know. According to your view, Germany should still be full of Nazis!

    And if you are saying it's only the English speaking genetic line that lacks empathy, do you not see the obvious racism in that view? You are generalizing a perceived group by highlighting a perceived trait that isn't based in verifiable data. Prove white English speakers have less empathy...

    That is just your experience... Is it not?

    Your statement is really unfortunate. There are good and evil people among all so-called races and regions. What matters to God, where their ancestors are from, or what their current heart condition is? My dad is a royal donkey's rear; does that also make all of his children one?

    Again, what you are presenting is precisely the ideology Hitler held against others, not of Arian origin.

    When you generalize people by family origins, you are perpetuating this evil world's ideologies of hate. I've known kind and evil among all regions, and family backgrounds. The only thing that mattered was their heart condition.

    That is a deplorable statement, Jan.

    With all due respect, in my opinion, this is a very racist and generalized statement. Simply associating perceived personality traits across an entire perceived group of people is generalizing and perpetuating stereotypes.

    It's very unfortunate to read such things from someone professing to be Christian. I hope you consider for a moment you could be wrong.

    Jan......

    I can't stress to you how generalized and how racist this statement is. People from all walks of life are either good or evil. Our family origins have nothing to do with our adoption of moral values. We choose our own values. Genetic morality is the ideology of hate that has killed millions throughout history.

    I pray deeply that our Lord guides you to a more appropriate perspective.

    There is so much pain and hurt in your writing. So much hate... If someone you consider to be Anglo-Saxon has hurt you, I pray you come to grips with a more balanced perspective. I truly do... And if I can help in any way possible, I am here for you.

    That is a very common error. We always judge others to determine if they are someone we should associate with or not. We must also judge others if we are to correct their misunderstandings. Are we not? We do not judge them as to say they are or aren't making it into the kingdom of God, but we must most certainly discern their current actions and words as it pertains to our interactions with them.

    I'm sorry, brother, but in my opinion, you have entirely misunderstood what agape and true love is. Love is defined as an action, according to God, not a feeling. That is its importance. Feel free to read my posts above if you are interested in what I presented on this subject.

    I don't mean to sound like I'm trying to knock you down a peg. In no way is that my intention here. But If someone thinks my ideologies, actions, or words are inappropriate, I hope they would speak plainly with me, just as I have done here with you. And trust me, others have, and I have greatly benefited from their correction, and I will forever be grateful.

    With all hopeful Christian love...

    Joshua
     
    Last edited: Mar 3, 2024
  13. 725
    50
    28
    Jan

    Jan Active Member

    Joined:
    Aug 7, 2014
    Messages:
    725
    Likes Received:
    50
    Trophy Points:
    28
    Thanks Joshua for your reply, it was very informative to get your reaction to the statements I had in my letter. Now I can guess the reaction of the brothers in the Writing Committee. I did not expect someone would link this to Nazi ideology. In Wikipedia the term Anglo-Saxon is explained if you want to know what I wanted to say.
    But don't you think it is a weakness that the Governing body is not composed of French, Italian, South Asian, South American Latios etc?
    And Samuel Herd as a single black there is maybe held there just like a mascot, to virtue signal?
     
  14. 725
    50
    28
    Jan

    Jan Active Member

    Joined:
    Aug 7, 2014
    Messages:
    725
    Likes Received:
    50
    Trophy Points:
    28
    Isn’t love a feeling? I can’t understand these scriptures otherwise.

    1 Peter 4:8 Above all things, have intense love for one another, because love covers a multitude of sins.


    1 John 4:18 There is no fear in love, but perfect love casts fear out, because fear restrains us. Indeed, the one who is fearful has not been made perfect in love.


    There are different kinds of feelings as we know, joy, anger, sadness, calm, stress, guilt, excitement, boredom, frustration, fear etc. And love which is the best of all.


    When you feel love you don’t fear. When you feel love toward someone you are unable to be angry at that person.

    So that is what we need to do, let the love flow in your body. If it is difficult, we need to pray for help in this regard.
     
  15. 159
    41
    28
    Timothy Kline

    Timothy Kline Member

    Joined:
    Jan 16, 2021
    Messages:
    159
    Likes Received:
    41
    Trophy Points:
    28
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    Perry, MI
    Christian greetings, Jan,

    ...and apologies if I'm interjecting in the discussion between @Joshuastone7 and you. Just some thoughts here...

    I wouldn't presume to suggest that there were no notable distinctions insofar between the seventy nations Jehovah created before choosing Abraham to bring into existence a nation for Himself. The differences included not only genetic characteristics, but also language, social, philosophical, and religious views and practices.

    The scriptures themselves delineate without fail between Jew and Gentile from the Mosaic Covenant and to the fulfillment of what the Mosaic Covenant could only promise and point to. It is reasonable, then, that the Jews would have a different view of love from that which Gentiles did in their time of separation from Jehovah God. Sure, there would be commonality found among Humankind in general... the natural love of a mother for the babe drawing sustenance from her breast, for example. Or, the exchange of love between husband and wife not only in moments of intimacy, but in word and deed in all their waking moments, even as Christ loves his bride, and the bride's faithful love given to her husband.

    The scriptures also declare that there remains no longer that distinction between the Gentile and the Jew.

    I am reminded of the words countless newlyweds have heard: "What God has joined together, let no man put asunder," which Jesus said to the Pharisees on one occasion. God put asunder and wrought seventy nations into existence and chose a man to seed a nation to bring forth the means by which that which He had put asunder would again be joined together. (Mark 10:9; Matthew 19:6)

    Of course, this only takes place through the transformative process of one's living on the path set by Jesus Christ, living as a believer. Maturing through the fellowship we have with our Father in the heavens through the holy spirit bearing witness within us, convicting us as believers and everything that follows that moment.

    This doesn't apply to those one would describe as "wordly" because the view which love is nothing akin or derived from that which the natural, carnal man thinks or even comprehends as love is beyond the worldly to comprehend.

    Easy example: The "world's" view of love includes the view that when it comes to marriage it's ok to "try before you buy" and is abundantly comfortable in sharing intimacy (extra-marital sex) which the Creator deigned exclusively for a husband and wife-- blind, as the world is, to this divine portrayal and connection with what Jehovah would bring into existence by means of a seed.

    We ourselves certainly wouldn't know what real, true love is if we hadn't felt that cut at our heart when we are caused to comprehend what Jesus' death cost God, and for what? [[The likes of me, miserable wretch that I am??!!]] That moment, that instant of conviction sets the baseline by which we thereafter approach others, does it not? (John 13:35)

    Speaking for myself, I am not a reader of hearts. Most days, I'm compelled to realize and acknowledge I can't read my own.

    If you are asking if there's a perceived weakness, though, I suppose that's possible, and even to be expected if one is expecting cultural, national, genetic diversity --and basing qualification of station on said distinctions.

    It's just as possible that if there was a broader diversity of racial distinctions on the Governing Body of Jehovah's Witnesses, there would be people who saw this as only being done to satisfy those complaining of a lack of diversity.

    And around and around it goes, just like that.

    Personally, I'm more interested in what is coming from their declarations than which nationality or genetic path they are the result of, what they promote, teach, and expect others to promote and teach in order to secure organizational approval.

    Didn't intend to ramble on this long, lol!

    Submitted for your perusal and consideration,
    Timothy
    a believer
     
    Joshuastone7 likes this.
  16. 4,459
    837
    113
    Joshuastone7

    Joshuastone7 Administrator Staff Member

    Joined:
    Jan 26, 2013
    Messages:
    4,459
    Likes Received:
    837
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    I prefer to look at these matters objectively. Let's say the GB was composed of individuals of differing skin colors, regional family backgrounds, and languages. They would be accused of only choosing these individuals based on eugenics. Even you are doing just that by saying Samuel Herd was only chosen because he's black. That claim would be even louder if they were all of differing genetic backgrounds. They would all be chosen only because of genetics. So, combining all white English speakers into one grouping and stating they all have less empathy because of their genetics is precisely what racism is. That is exactly how the Nazis came to believe all Jews were liars and thieves, simply because of their genetic family history. We are all individuals with free will, separate from our family histories.

    Another way to look at this is this: If the GB were looking for the most qualified individuals, then population numbers would come into play. The percentage of so-called white people in the US is 60%. Simple mathematics would say if you were only looking for the most qualified individuals, they would likely be from the most populated group. In Africa, if you are looking for the most qualified individual for a position, they will likely be of a darker skin color, given the math of population density.

    In finale, I'm not saying there is no bias in the governing body. But, what it appears to me is it's more about who you know. In every business on the planet, it is more likely they will hire from within. The squeaky wheel gets the grease. The recent new members all worked in the headquarters, for example. You move up based on who you rub elbows with.

    Was Mr. Herd chosen because of his skin color? Maybe... What if they were all chosen simply because of skin color? That would make them racist and saying genetics matters. If they were all white, what would that say? People would say they are racist and they only care about genetics.

    So what should we think? All we can do is us.... We can't make anyone do anything. We can't make the GB do anything. No one can make us feel anything; we choose to allow the outside world to affect us how we wish. With that in mind, if we see individuals as individuals and not groups of people, we will separate ourselves from the evil ideologies of this world, which began at the Tower of Babel. Does racism exist? Of course, it does because the people of this world profit from it's continued existence. It helps promote their evil ideologies. Should we perpetuate it? That's the question we should ask ourselves.

    All love, dear brother...

    Joshua
     
  17. 725
    50
    28
    Jan

    Jan Active Member

    Joined:
    Aug 7, 2014
    Messages:
    725
    Likes Received:
    50
    Trophy Points:
    28
    Hi Timothy, nice to meet you. I am always especially happy to get to know new people who are of the anointed, because we can relate to each other.

    And thanks for your comments on my posts. I am a big believer in diversity. And I have always been. Now this year I thought I will visit different congregations in Stockholm where I live, despite being wrongly disfellowshipped for apostasy 16 years ago.

    I know well 5 languages besides English which are Finnish, Swedish, Russian, French and Spanish. But some Latvian and Arabic too. So I have visited and observed different language congregations: two English congregations, 3 Spanish congregations, one Finnish congregation, a French speaking group, 2 Russian speaking congregations and several Swedish speaking congregations. Some of them in areas that are mainly ethnically Swedish and others that are in areas that are mainly migrant areas, and therefore these congregations consist mainly of migrants of different origins.

    My observation is that the most diverse congregations are the most spiritually vibrant congregations. I get that feeling listening to the comments during the meetings.

    Some weekends I have visited 3 different congregations. Now it is easy, on jw.org you can find all meeting places and meeting times. I got to know that just about 2 months ago.


    So my conclusion is in accord with many others that people from the same backgrounds and ethnicities are more similar to each other. But by mixing different ethnicities we can learn from each other. One “race” is good at something and another “race” is good at something else. Of course there is diversity also within the same “race” too.


    In the Western world it has become negative even to speak about the existence of races. But the Bible uses that so I think I can use that word too.


    Acts 7:19 This one dealt cunningly with our race and wrongfully forced the fathers to abandon their infants so that they would not be kept alive.


    Acts 10:28 He said to them: “You well know how unlawful it is for a Jew to associate with or approach a man of another race, and yet God has shown me that I should call no man defiled or unclean.
     
  18. 725
    50
    28
    Jan

    Jan Active Member

    Joined:
    Aug 7, 2014
    Messages:
    725
    Likes Received:
    50
    Trophy Points:
    28
    Well said Timothy,
    This reminded me of 1 John 4:7 Beloved ones, let us continue loving one another, because love is from God, and everyone who loves has been born from God and knows God. 8 Whoever does not love has not come to know God, because God is love. 9 By this the love of God was revealed in our case, that God sent his only-begotten Son into the world so that we might gain life through him. 10 The love is in this respect, not that we have loved God, but that he loved us and sent his Son as a propitiatory sacrifice for our sins. 11 Beloved ones, if this is how God loved us, then we are also under obligation to love one another. 12 No one has seen God at any time. If we continue loving one another, God remains in us and his love is made perfect in us.

    And not only that, but Jesus himself loved us also and wanted to give himself as a ransom sacrifice for us.
     
  19. 159
    41
    28
    Timothy Kline

    Timothy Kline Member

    Joined:
    Jan 16, 2021
    Messages:
    159
    Likes Received:
    41
    Trophy Points:
    28
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    Perry, MI
    Oh, me, too! Diversity is self-evident in Creation as well as in those existing outside of [our] Creation, including angels capable of exhibiting what I interpret as earnestness when dealing with Lot's family in the last days of Sodom and Gomorrah. Angels can be faithful... or unfaithful. In our Creation, diversity can be seen in the flora as well as the fauna. As someone who has cared for abandoned cats and a few dogs over the course of my lifetime, I can testify to the diversity I had the joys (and sorrows) unique to each one.

    And you'll get no debate from me that appreciation can really only come from encounters with these diversities. As I recall, District Conventions were a great example of diversity, when I attended the Pontiac Silverdome location (it's been since relocated). A great scene of diversity and a commendable example of that special exchange of fellowship that takes place when we're not otherwise hurting or killing each other in that milieu in which believers today find themselves to varying degrees and personal cost.

    Both have diversity in their populations. Two disparate fruitages come of said diversity.

    Would a place like the Bronx or the ghettos of India be a better place for people to live, if there were more diversity there?

    The problem isn't diversity... it's the heart of man.

    And that problem's solved easy enough: Adamic death. It's there, waiting for us and occasionally looking at its watch.

    Diversity is a seasoning for fellowship between believers. On that, you will get no debate from me, as well. Cultures are so beautifully nuanced and rich in history. Fields of flowers, as it were, spread by the Owner of the Fields.

    Sounds like you've been blessed with the likes of Psalm 133:1, very nice!

    One hesitation for me here, though. "My observation," as you mentioned, could be very different for the next person. In other words, what you had the joy of experiencing may not be the case for another-- a believer who attended various congregations and was not warmly welcomed, did not experience the Christian love that is to be present. And another believer, attending still other diverse congregations is discouraged when they find men vying for congregational appointments, and backbiting amongst the congregations.

    The problem's not diversity. It's the heart.

    It might be a language/translation thing here, but there is only one race as far as the Bible has revealed: Man.

    Ethnicity and /or cultural differences, certainly. As one would expect, upon learning that the Gentiles originated in the seventy nations Jehovah (diversified) Man into via the sons of Noah. (Genesis 10) Especially once one factors in the development of a tribe-then-nation of Man that develops absolutely cut-off from his Creator. No awareness that He even exists.

    Not hard to imagine, since that's pretty much where each of us started down the Path as a believer. We didn't know God.

    Until we did.

    And from that time onwards, it seems as thought we've always known God, believed.

    Gotta wrap this up, though. Time to feed fur-babies.

    Submitted for your perusal and consideration,
    Timothy
    a believer.
     
  20. 4,459
    837
    113
    Joshuastone7

    Joshuastone7 Administrator Staff Member

    Joined:
    Jan 26, 2013
    Messages:
    4,459
    Likes Received:
    837
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    Greetings, Jan...

    After doing some research, it is apparent that Stockholm's ethnic population is 98.99% white. You have to understand something: In the US, we live in entirely diverse populations. We see every culture on the planet every minute of the day, no matter where we go. Our neighbors have different skin colors and backgrounds in all the homes around us.

    I know you've said you've visited diverse areas, but I'm not sure you truly understand the concept of a single race of "Man," as @Timothy suggested. We do not have the same kind of segregation here that you have in Europe. So, is it possible you may not be viewing this subject from someone who has lived in a truly diverse society?

    I'm curious if your lack of daily diversity has led you to a more extreme view of so-called race in an attempt to overcompensate for this. In the US, people of all backgrounds experience the same things in the same cities and neighborhoods. There generally are no differences in language, food, music, etc... People from all backgrounds tend to agree more than they disagree. Life among the people on the ground is quite different than what the Legacy news agencies would have you believe. The Left are the ones perpetuating the evil ideology of racism, not the people on the ground.

    Regardless, the science is clear;

    "In 2003, Phase 1 of the Human Genome Project (HGP) demonstrated that humans populating the earth today are on average 99.9% identical at the DNA level, there is no genetic basis for race, and there is more genetic variation within a race than between them." Library of Medicine

    Joshua
     

Share This Page