S/O Do followers of Jesus accept and love anyone, not condemning them?

[Lovedtodeath]

Then what is your viewpoint as to why Paul told us to cast people out of the congregation? To refuse to eat with them?

 

*asking gently* Doesn't this contradict the example Jesus set in his life?

 

(I'm not trying to trip you up, just interested in how you think about this. I frequently struggle with Paul's writings, so I'm always looking for ways to reconcile things.)

 

I don't think that he meant us to accept and love no matter what. I still state that we need to have some sort of boundary or we are just accepting serious sin and allowing it within our mist. I don't think that all sins are equal. God can read the heart and he knows if someone who continually tells white lies, or slanders, or steals, or has an abortion is doing so out of bad motive. We can't. Forgiveness is a more complex issue than we are led to believe. It is most often given after repentence. Then again those who do not claim to be our brother are not judged as harshly to begin with, neither are those who are not willfully and knowingly doing wrong.

Matthew 18:14 Likewise it is not a desirable thing with my Father who is in heaven for one of these little ones to perish.

15 “Moreover, if your brother commits a sin, go lay bare his fault between you and him alone. If he listens to you, you have gained your brother. 16 But if he does not listen, take along with you one or two more, in order that at the mouth of two or three witnesses every matter may be established. 17 If he does not listen to them, speak to the congregation. If he does not listen even to the congregation, let him be to you just as a man of the nations and as a tax collector.

Who was Jesus talking too? How did they treat men of the nations and tax collectors?

[lilbean05]

To accept and love does NOT mean to put yourself in a dangerous position or befriend everyone you meet. I do believe that as Christian, we are not only asked to accept and love and should want to accept and love everyone, but we should strive to be like Jesus who DID accept and love everyone without hesitation. Understanding that we have our human faults, this becomes one of the shortcomings we as humans have regularly and is a continual challenge for most.

 

As an example, and one that is a bit personal, I had a crummy relationship with person X in my family. A person that is supposed to be a huge part of my life. But it was bad. Even with trying to befriend and change and persue a relationship with this person as an adult, it is still an unhealthy situation for me to be in. I have really finally begun to find peace by learning to accept this person for who he/she is, love them in my heart despite their faults, yet I REFUSE to be in contact with this person or allow them near my family. Loving and accepting people for who they are does not mean that you are required to be best friends with them, or even be in contact with them. You forgive, love, accept them, and then press forward with no ill will.

 

I think that Paul, when he is talking about banishing people from the church among other things, is not saying that you are excising them like a cancer so that you are not to be surrounded by them. I think that what he is discussing is the importance of being held accountable for your actions (not you, but the person being banished--and typically I think this is only for a short period of time).

 

For example, very recently, a very well known local church had a wonderful pastor who has really been a leader to his congregation, bringing many people to the Lord. Out of no where, he came forward and confessed that he was guilty of something and that he was stepping down as pastor to get his life back on track. Even if he didn't make the choice to step down, the bi-laws of the overarching church have a system established in which the church leader, upon confession or discovery of something unethical or sinful in nature, will be asked to leave the leadership position for 2 years time. They are asked to spend 6 weeks of it in retreat, preferably as a family or at least husband and wife if married. After this time to reflect, repent, and self discover, along with a "rehabilition" time of the 2 years, the pastor is welcome back as a leader. He is allowed to attend the church at all times, and is always allowed the support of the congretation, but in a sense, he is "banished" for the 6 weeks to really reflect on his life. This is what I think Paul means.

 

I can talk more about it, and I didn't proofread so apologizes for confusion or mistakes. But, those are my thoughts.

[Geo]

Who was Jesus talking too? How did they treat men of the nations and tax collectors?

 

In Matt 18:15-17, Jesus was speaking to His disciples about how to deal with those who offend in the church. "Men of the nations" would be another way of refering to gentiles, or more specifically, unbelievers. Unbelievers do not have fellowship in the body of Christ. Any believer who behaves "woefully" (without repentence) will treated as an unbeliever...shunned from inclusion in body-fellowship. However, this does not carry "condemnation". If the offending party repents, they may be received back into fellowship. Even though the church has authority to discipline it's members, God alone judges him. In other words, any misjudgement made by the church, will be judged rightly by God.

 

 

Geo

Edited July 24, 2009 by Geo

[creekland]

My quick reply is that yes we are to love everyone - period. We are not to judge OUTSIDE the church. Period. Little things like 'they will know we are Christians by our love,' and 'As much as it is possible with you, live at peace with everyone' speak volumes as much as the Golden Rule.

 

Inside the church we are supposed to make judgments and help keep each other following the Christian life (gently if possible). And, of course, we all make judgments on our own life - and for parents - we make judgments for our kids in order to raise them the best way we can.

 

The difference being those that don't choose to follow God are not our concern with regards to lifestyle. Those that do we're supposed to encourage and edify... just as they are to do for us... knowing in the end we are each responsible for ourselves.

[PineFarmMom]

I have sort of an example of this situation. We are in a small congregation. Within that congregation was a woman who says she's a Christian and has stirred up much trouble among the people. She talked about everyone badly, would ostracize people who didn't do things her way, and used her $$ within the church to gain sway over the pastor. When our honest and trustworthy pastor wouldn't budge, she got mad. She left the church but kept in contact with a few of the women and now keeps in the "know" about our church through her contact with them. These women KNOW that she is trouble but they stay in contact with her, which has created more problems because her running mouth has kept them in a spiritually bad position of being a party to sin like that. It winds up affecting all of us. The best thing to do in this situation is for us to have nothing to do with this woman who is a trouble-maker, because she's proven repeatedly that THAT is her goal: to cause trouble and break down the church! In everyday, non-churchy terms, I would label this woman as toxic. God has led me not to spend my time with toxic people.

 

Really, after experiencing this situation, I understand why Paul says what he does. I don't, however, think that we are to treat non-Christians in that manner. We are to love and forgive. I believe that "don't even eat with such a one" applies to a Christian who is choosing to do exactly what he/she knows is very wrong, to the detriment of others.

[OHGrandma]

I think if Paul had written in modern vernacular he would have said, "Don't be an enabler."

Is your love(loving action) drawing them to truth and righteousnous, or is it allowing the person to continue/go deeper into sin?

[PineFarmMom]

I think if Paul had written in modern vernacular he would have said, "Don't be an enabler."

Is your love(loving action) drawing them to truth and righteousnous, or is it allowing the person to continue/go deeper into sin?

 

 

Good point!! I've been an enabler in the church in the name of being "loving". I've been burned doing that also! ;) I think it takes time and little God lessons to learn why Paul says that in the first place.

[johnandtinagilbert]

There is always someone that is meant to intervene for another, either within the body of Christ, or out. In both cases, a person should follow the leading of the Holy Spirit. God is the judge. We are simply instruments.

 

Within the church, the toxic person example fits the bill. Another example within the church might be simply looking for people who encourage you to grow in your faith. If you've spent time with someone who doesn't walk the way you believe you should walk, you should stay away. It doesn't mean you judge them. In fact, it can sometimes mean you recognize your own weakness and you need to remove yourself from them in order to walk well. Others within the body may simply be in a different place than you, so you find other "friends" within the body.

 

As for gentiles (in the modern, any non-believer sense), no judgment should be placed, but one must walk with wisdom. We have this type of scenario a lot in our ministry. You spend one on one, very relationship building, time with a person. You share the gospel. You live the gospel. You guide. You teach. You lay it out and then you watch for signs of growth. Then you'll either see fruit, or not. If not, then you accept you are not the person that will have the gift of witnessing their salvation. You dust you feet and move on. You don't break bread with them b/c they have rejected the gospel and you get on with your life. Sometimes this is peaceful, or a peaceful progression, other times the person becomes violent or angry.

 

This doesn't mean you don't love them. Generally, the contrary is true. At least for me. I tend to get very heart-involved and I weep for them. You continue to pray earnestly for them until the desire is no longer there. In your heart, you love them, you just accept you are not the person that will have the gift of witnessing their salvation. You're not judging them and in truth you are absolutely accepting them for who they are and you realize they are a person who has, at least for now, rejected the gospel.

 

In today's world, the significance of breaking bread has been diminished for most, but for some (like us) we're cautious and find bread breaking a great time to share our testimony, even if just to our own children.

 

I hope this makes sense. I guess I want to add, loving someone doesn't mean being their best friend. Loving someone doesn't mean keeping them happy. For me, love is often painful b/c it causes me to look at the real me and become accountable for who I really am...which is always a broken sinner who desperately needs improvement and has a long road before I look more like Jesus than Tina.

[johnandtinagilbert]

I think if Paul had written in modern vernacular he would have said, "Don't be an enabler."

Is your love(loving action) drawing them to truth and righteousnous, or is it allowing the person to continue/go deeper into sin?

 

Well spoken.

[Laurie4b]

I don't think that he meant us to accept and love no matter what. I still state that we need to have some sort of boundary or we are just accepting serious sin and allowing it within our mist. I don't think that all sins are equal. God can read the heart and he knows if someone who continually tells white lies, or slanders, or steals, or has an abortion is doing so out of bad motive. We can't. Forgiveness is a more complex issue than we are led to believe. It is most often given after repentence. Then again those who do not claim to be our brother are not judged as harshly to begin with, neither are those who are not willfully and knowingly doing wrong.

 

Who was Jesus talking too? How did they treat men of the nations and tax collectors?

 

I think it is useful to distinguish between when we are acting as individuals and when we might occupy particular roles that God has assigned that requiring judging. Authority to judge has been given to the government over the moral behavior of its citizens, to elders over the moral behavior of their members, and to parents over the moral behavior of their children. Judging means that you are passing sentence. I do that every time I give my children a consequence for misbehavior. I don't have any other authority to pass judgment in life. (ie It is not up to me to shun an individual Christian whom my church elders have not officially disciplined in that way. It is not up to me to do vigilante justice if a crime is committed and the judge and jury don't "get it right." )

 

The example of judging my children I think helps convey our attitude when we are in a position to judge: it is not contrary to love, and it is not a permanent condemnation. It is a temporary way to address specific sin.

 

Does our call not to judge mean that there are certain people with whom we don't associate? Not if "not associating" means "I find them repulsive and not to be included in my circle. They are not my level." It is acceptable "not to associate" if the person presents an actual danger to us or our children because the lack of association doesn't have to do with condemnation of them as an individual, but with safety from them as an individual.

 

We are doing wrong when we "punish" someone outside of our authority to punish.

[PineFarmMom]

I don't know why exactly, but this is such a helpful thread to me!! Tina, what you said was good for me to read. We have had such church turmoil in the past year with a little church plant we helped to start 2 years ago. There has been so much back-biting and dealing with people who weren't there for the motives of being like Christ but for their own gain. It's been a real struggle for us to see the lines of when we just needed to set certain people aside and focus on others and how to even deal with people at all. I'm realizing more and more that Paul does have a reason for saying what he does. For us, for no other reason than time, we have seen that there are people we just have to choose not to focus on so we can focus on those who really desire to be what Christ wants them to be. I think we're in the process of learning the distinctions. I feel a little jaded at times, though, and want to be careful about allowing people to get too close to me.

[Peela]

I don't think that he meant us to accept and love no matter what.

 

I disagree. I think thats exactly what Jesus meant. However, it doesn't mean let someone walk all over you. I think the issue is more that people are confused about what the concepts love and accept mean. They are huge, deep , vast qualities that embrace the good and the bad in people- but that doesn't mean condoning the bad. It doesnt lack discrimination or deny wise behaviour, it just doesn't "shut down" the love because of it. One can love and accept and run the other direction, or stand up to a bully, or turn one's attention from a draining relationship.

 

I still state that we need to have some sort of boundary or we are just accepting serious sin and allowing it within our mist.

 

And I dont think there need be any conflict between needing to set a boundary, and keeping one's heart open. The conflict comes when one sees love as an emotion that one can turn on and off as one sees the other deserves- and I think Jesus's whole message is that everyone is deserving. Everyone. That doesn't mean one puts oneself in harm's way or can't ever say no. Loving oneself is just as important as loving another. But its not up to us to separate the world into those who deserve love and those who don't.

 

Forgiveness is a more complex issue than we are led to believe. It is most often given after repentence.

 

I dont think fogiveness is complex at all. It is simple- but not always easy because we want to hold onto our petty darker emotions. I think forgiveness is meant to be unconditional, however it certainly is easier if the other is repentant. Thats human. But I think the aim is to be able to be big enough to forgive anyway.

[Orthodox6]

Responding only to the question in the thread title, the answer is "yes". Christians do not possess the authority "to condemn." To love someone does not entail approving of his beliefs or conduct. I posted in the original thread why I say this.

Edited July 24, 2009 by Orthodox6

[Quiver0f10]

We are to love the sinner, not the SIN. We are to love our neighbor. Loving our neighbor means showing them the love of Christ unconditionally.

[Melinda in VT]

As for gentiles (in the modern, any non-believer sense), no judgment should be placed, but one must walk with wisdom. We have this type of scenario a lot in our ministry. You spend one on one, very relationship building, time with a person. You share the gospel. You live the gospel. You guide. You teach. You lay it out and then you watch for signs of growth. Then you'll either see fruit, or not. If not, then you accept you are not the person that will have the gift of witnessing their salvation. You dust you feet and move on. You don't break bread with them b/c they have rejected the gospel and you get on with your life. Sometimes this is peaceful, or a peaceful progression, other times the person becomes violent or angry.

 

Am I reading this correctly? You will stop associating with a friend for no other reason than they do not change their religious beliefs to match yours?

 

This sounds pretty harsh to me, but I recognize I might be misunderstanding you.

[Melinda in VT]

Oh, and I have one more thought--of course; I couldn't get it all together in one shot.

 

I think the question is interesting because it seems to assume that JESUS "accepted" without condemnation everyone's behavior. But I think that any cursory reading of the Gospels would beg this question: What did Jesus do?

 

Read any one of the Gospels asking this question. See what Jesus did.

 

Modern understanding of Jesus is ill-informed about Jesus and what He said and did. It would be a great benefit to most people to read at least one Gospel and ask the question of Christ Himself.

 

:)

 

Well, I have read the gospels. All of them. Multiple times.

 

So far, my understanding is that Jesus calls us to love, but not to judge. He makes judgments at times, but those judgments often go against what we would think the judgment would be. Given that I don't trust myself to know the mind of God enough to judge how Jesus would judge, I choose to err on the side of loving too much rather than judging too much.

 

(Or, at least, that's the goal. Judgmentalism is one of my personal spiritual bugaboos.)

[lionfamily1999]

I answered this is the other thread, but I'll post it here too :)

 

I think we're meant to love everyone, but that does not mean that we have to be friends with them. IOW, love your neighbor, but if your neighbor is a drug abuser, love them from a distance. Let them borrow eggs and milk and don't expect to get it back. Show them the love that Jesus told us to have and help them when you can, but that does not mean you have to let them move in or help them shoot up. You don't have to drive them to their dealer's house or become an accessory to their crimes. You pray for them and you help them in every Christian way you can, you just don't allow them to drag you into their sin.

 

It makes sense to me anyway ;)

[Chris in VA]

I do believe all sins are equal in the eyes of God.

That is because He is Holy. It is a very challenging belief. I think that is what Jesus was talking about when he told people that they condemned murderers but then murdered others in their hearts. It's the same in God's eyes.

The good news is that

He loves us and offers Himself as the way out of sin.

 

I try hard not to look at someone else's sin without examining my own. Since we are both on equal footing in the eyes of God, I can't say I am less sinful than someone else. So, I can't judge myself to be more worthy of God's love.

 

Jesus ate with sinners--I think he was trying to show those in power, who placed so much importance on following the law, that no one can follow it completely, and God offers compassion and relationship with Himself thru Jesus.

 

He never condoned sin. He always sought the best in people, but he never said sin was ok.

 

We, however, are human. It's possible that the admonition to not associate with sinners who were not willing to stop the behaviors they were doing was to keep others from falling into those same behaviors, or, to provide an example of a community that sins, yes, but repents and depends on the Lord for forgiveness.

 

My 2 cents.

[OnTheBrink]

Well, I have read the gospels. All of them. Multiple times.

 

So far, my understanding is that Jesus calls us to love, but not to judge. He makes judgments at times, but those judgments often go against what we would think the judgment would be. Given that I don't trust myself to know the mind of God enough to judge how Jesus would judge, I choose to err on the side of loving too much rather than judging too much.

 

(Or, at least, that's the goal. Judgmentalism is one of my personal spiritual bugaboos.)

 

He also told many to sin no more. He also got really ticked and overturned tables in the temple. He told people to knock of their whining and pay attention to his words. He told the Pharisees many times that they were full of it. (note: these are my modern vernacular paraphrases). There's a lot more to the gospels than Jesus is Love. He is, no question, but he had no tolerance for sin and I think people (in general) forget or ignore that. He was quick to forgive the repentant, and while he still loved the unrepentant, they are not bound for heaven.

[johnandtinagilbert]

Am I reading this correctly? You will stop associating with a friend for no other reason than they do not change their religious beliefs to match yours?

 

This sounds pretty harsh to me, but I recognize I might be misunderstanding you.

 

You're misunderstanding :)

 

My example was specifically meant for individuals in a ministry specific role in my life. We minister to people who lack understanding, knowledge, even the existence of how to feed their children, most are drug addicted, they lack communication skills so they fight constantly, don't keep their homes clean, don't clothe their children warmly in the winter, can't cook, do drugs in front of their kids, abuse each other in front of their kids, don't work, etc.

 

We offer them guidance, hands on learning, a listening ear, etc. We only offer once they have asked for help.

 

An example, a young woman's husband wanted her to be a SAHM. She didn't clean. She didn't cook. The child was poorly taken care of. Her husband commented one night on what a nice meal I prepared for them (the mom was sick with the flu). She came to me and asked me to teach her how to cook. I invited her into my home every night for 2+ weeks and taught her how to prepare basic meals. At the same time, I encouraged her in what Proverbs 31 says about an excellent wife. We spent a lot of time together. I helped her clean her home. I taught her about organizing and gave her many tools that would help to please her husband and learn to be a better wife. Admittedly, she had none of these skills b/c of a poor upbringing.

 

She worked at it for about 1 week, then gave up. She told me off. She didn't want to live the way I did (although her husband does). I walked away. I shared what I know and she rejected it. That's what I mean. Not necesarily "Christian living," but also general living.

 

From what I know, she continues to use drugs a bit more than recreationally and she and her husband continue to battle in their home.

 

I would help her, or someone like her, as long as they were willing to learn.

 

Another person my family ministers to (for 2 years now) continues to learn and grow under our family's direction. She started in the same place as the girl above, but now feeds her children well, keeps a cleaner home, disciplines in love (not screaming, swinging smacks), and spends time before God b/c after living more peacefully with the things we've encouraged, and us attributing our understanding to Godly living via the Bible's instruction, she sees we live how we think God tells us to and that has brought us peace. Our relationship is now one of sisterhood, not just mentorship.

 

Hope I'm making more sense.

[Melinda in VT]

You're misunderstanding :)

 

My example was specifically meant for individuals in a ministry specific role in my life. We minister to people who lack understanding, knowledge, even the existence of how to feed their children, most are drug addicted, they lack communication skills so they fight constantly, don't keep their homes clean, don't clothe their children warmly in the winter, can't cook, do drugs in front of their kids, abuse each other in front of their kids, don't work, etc.

 

We offer them guidance, hands on learning, a listening ear, etc. We only offer once they have asked for help.

 

An example, a young woman's husband wanted her to be a SAHM. She didn't clean. She didn't cook. The child was poorly taken care of. Her husband commented one night on what a nice meal I prepared for them (the mom was sick with the flu). She came to me and asked me to teach her how to cook. I invited her into my home every night for 2+ weeks and taught her how to prepare basic meals. At the same time, I encouraged her in what Proverbs 31 says about an excellent wife. We spent a lot of time together. I helped her clean her home. I taught her about organizing and gave her many tools that would help to please her husband and learn to be a better wife. Admittedly, she had none of these skills b/c of a poor upbringing.

 

She worked at it for about 1 week, then gave up. She told me off. She didn't want to live the way I did (although her husband does). I walked away. I shared what I know and she rejected it. That's what I mean. Not necesarily "Christian living," but also general living.

 

From what I know, she continues to use drugs a bit more than recreationally and she and her husband continue to battle in their home.

 

I would help her, or someone like her, as long as they were willing to learn.

 

Another person my family ministers to (for 2 years now) continues to learn and grow under our family's direction. She started in the same place as the girl above, but now feeds her children well, keeps a cleaner home, disciplines in love (not screaming, swinging smacks), and spends time before God b/c after living more peacefully with the things we've encouraged, and us attributing our understanding to Godly living via the Bible's instruction, she sees we live how we think God tells us to and that has brought us peace. Our relationship is now one of sisterhood, not just mentorship.

 

Hope I'm making more sense.

 

Thank you so much for clarifying. I can see I did completely misunderstand your earlier post.

[johnandtinagilbert]

I answered this is the other thread, but I'll post it here too :)

 

I think we're meant to love everyone, but that does not mean that we have to be friends with them. IOW, love your neighbor, but if your neighbor is a drug abuser, love them from a distance. Let them borrow eggs and milk and don't expect to get it back. Show them the love that Jesus told us to have and help them when you can, but that does not mean you have to let them move in or help them shoot up. You don't have to drive them to their dealer's house or become an accessory to their crimes. You pray for them and you help them in every Christian way you can, you just don't allow them to drag you into their sin.

 

It makes sense to me anyway ;)

:iagree: I love many people from a distance through prayer and anonymous giving.

[johnandtinagilbert]

Thank you so much for clarifying. I can see I did completely misunderstand your earlier post.

Thank you for asking. I'd hate for anyone to misunderstand what I meant. Especially when representing God (by calling my self Christian).

[emeraldjoy]

yep.

Well, I have read the gospels. All of them. Multiple times.

 

So far, my understanding is that Jesus calls us to love, but not to judge. He makes judgments at times, but those judgments often go against what we would think the judgment would be. Given that I don't trust myself to know the mind of God enough to judge how Jesus would judge, I choose to err on the side of loving too much rather than judging too much.

 

(Or, at least, that's the goal. Judgmentalism is one of my personal spiritual bugaboos.)

[HeatherLynn]

I think if Paul had written in modern vernacular he would have said, "Don't be an enabler."

Is your love(loving action) drawing them to truth and righteousnous, or is it allowing the person to continue/go deeper into sin?

 

I agree

[Greta]

I want to thank everyone for their comments in this thread. This is really helpful to me, with the issues I am exploring in my own spiritual life right now.

 

Given that I don't trust myself to know the mind of God enough to judge how Jesus would judge, I choose to err on the side of loving too much rather than judging too much.

 

Just wanted to say that this really jumped out at me, given that Jesus said the most important commandment is to love.

 

but he had no tolerance for sin and I think people (in general) forget or ignore that.

 

Not that you were talking about me specifically when you said this, but I recognize that Jesus didn't tolerate sin. But I think he did have a tremendous, amazing, miraculous amount of tolerance and love for sinners. With regards to my participation in the original thread, I was not attempting to imply that Jesus didn't distinguish between sinful actions and right actions. Obviously he did! I think there can be no question of that. But my reading of the gospels leads me to believe that he loved even the people who committed those sinful actions, and wants us to do the same. I don't necessarily think that loving them means you have to accept drug abusers into your home, or anything like that. It's more a matter of how you feel about them in your heart, perhaps? A matter of being there to help (as opposed to enable!) them if you can, and not feeling morally superior to them, but recognizing that we ALL fall short and fail, and in that, in our humanity, we are all alike.

 

I wonder if anyone would care to comment on this. I came away from reading the gospels with the feeling that the ONLY person on this entire planet I am "allowed" to judge is myself. But I note the comments here about judging our children and, to a certain extent, other Christians. Well, I don't have any particular question, I guess, just thinking about it.

[johnandtinagilbert]

 

I wonder if anyone would care to comment on this. I came away from reading the gospels with the feeling that the ONLY person on this entire planet I am "allowed" to judge is myself. But I note the comments here about judging our children and, to a certain extent, other Christians. Well, I don't have any particular question, I guess, just thinking about it.

 

I think more that Judgment is meant to bring about justice. Since You are the only person you can change, you don't necessarily bring about personal judgment, as much as you are the only person on Earth that can really, honestly, Know Your Own Heart. No one else is in the position to do that. As a result, you are the only person to bring about personal change. That is a uniqueness of our individuality. Does that make sense. I'm not saying it well.

 

Every good authority works toward justice and guides in correct direction. I suppose there is a means of "Judge" there, but more than, or in addition to being a judge, an authority has accountability to disciple. That's why we are called to discipline in love and not by means of Justice. Jesus said, "I discipline those who I love." So in our wisdom (hopefully ;) ) we pass judgment with the intention of guidance, but not judgment...I hope I'm making sense. I'm having a hard time finding the words.

 

God has Really, really, really worked on my and judgment over the past 2 years. It can be a tough place to be and an ever tougher place Not to be!

[lionfamily1999]

I want to thank everyone for their comments in this thread. This is really helpful to me, with the issues I am exploring in my own spiritual life right now.

 

 

 

Just wanted to say that this really jumped out at me, given that Jesus said the most important commandment is to love. Love God above all others, then love your neighbor :) I forget that too often.

 

 

 

Not that you were talking about me specifically when you said this, but I recognize that Jesus didn't tolerate sin. But I think he did have a tremendous, amazing, miraculous amount of tolerance and love for sinners. With regards to my participation in the original thread, I was not attempting to imply that Jesus didn't distinguish between sinful actions and right actions. Obviously he did! I think there can be no question of that. But my reading of the gospels leads me to believe that he loved even the people who committed those sinful actions, and wants us to do the same. I don't necessarily think that loving them means you have to accept drug abusers into your home, or anything like that. It's more a matter of how you feel about them in your heart, perhaps? A matter of being there to help (as opposed to enable!) them if you can, and not feeling morally superior to them, but recognizing that we ALL fall short and fail, and in that, in our humanity, we are all alike.

 

I wonder if anyone would care to comment on this. I came away from reading the gospels with the feeling that the ONLY person on this entire planet I am "allowed" to judge is myself. But I note the comments here about judging our children and, to a certain extent, other Christians. Well, I don't have any particular question, I guess, just thinking about it.

I'm rereading the New Testament, it's been quite awhile and some of my friends on here I have put it into my head that I need to study up, lol. One thing I've noticed is that Jesus DID sit with people that were considered beneath contempt, and he gave them a chance. The ones that turned from their sins and chose the right path stayed with him, but he didn't hang around waiting for everyone. He'd go into a city and if they refused to follow him, he would leave. He said they would be sorry for having refused him, but he said it as fact, rather than opinion (iow, you'll get yours in a tone of anger vs. you'll get yours as a matter of fact). He moved on. I think that means, try to help, but don't stagnate there, don't let a non-believer keep you spinning tires in one spot, when there's work for you elsewhere.

 

It seems for every answer there's a million new questions.

 

So, I don't think we're supposed to "judge" others, so much as make a judgement call for our own good. You tell your kids right and wrong and when they're little you met out punishment to help them understand those rules and the idea of consequences. You don't condemn them, but you do condemn their actions.

 

Am I making any sense whatsoever? Lol... I'm trying.

[johnandtinagilbert]

I'm rereading the New Testament, it's been quite awhile and some of my friends on here I have put it into my head that I need to study up, lol. One thing I've noticed is that Jesus DID sit with people that were considered beneath contempt, and he gave them a chance. The ones that turned from their sins and chose the right path stayed with him, but he didn't hang around waiting for everyone. He'd go into a city and if they refused to follow him, he would leave. He said they would be sorry for having refused him, but he said it as fact, rather than opinion (iow, you'll get yours in a tone of anger vs. you'll get yours as a matter of fact). He moved on. I think that means, try to help, but don't stagnate there, don't let a non-believer keep you spinning tires in one spot, when there's work for you elsewhere.

 

It seems for every answer there's a million new questions.

 

So, I don't think we're supposed to "judge" others, so much as make a judgement call for our own good. You tell your kids right and wrong and when they're little you met out punishment to help them understand those rules and the idea of consequences. You don't condemn them, but you do condemn their actions.

 

Am I making any sense whatsoever? Lol... I'm trying.

 

You are making perfect sense. Jesus did not tarry. He pointed people to the Father and moved on. You said that much clearer than I have.Thank You! Authority incorporates love and guidance not harsh judgment.

[OnTheBrink]

 

 

Not that you were talking about me specifically when you said this, but I recognize that Jesus didn't tolerate sin. But I think he did have a tremendous, amazing, miraculous amount of tolerance and love for sinners. With regards to my participation in the original thread, I was not attempting to imply that Jesus didn't distinguish between sinful actions and right actions. Obviously he did! I think there can be no question of that. But my reading of the gospels leads me to believe that he loved even the people who committed those sinful actions, and wants us to do the same. I don't necessarily think that loving them means you have to accept drug abusers into your home, or anything like that. It's more a matter of how you feel about them in your heart, perhaps? A matter of being there to help (as opposed to enable!) them if you can, and not feeling morally superior to them, but recognizing that we ALL fall short and fail, and in that, in our humanity, we are all alike.

 

 

 

You're right; Jesus loves sinners. They're the only ones He died for. ;) I was trying to point out, though, that often in this day and time people (in general) focus on the "god is LOVE" and interpret that as meaning it doesn't matter what we do, we're all going to heaven and be one big happy family in an eternal love-in. That's just not what the gospel says.

 

And, you're right again; it is really about how we view other people and it is difficult at times to draw the line between love and exposing yourself and condoning ongoing sinful patterns of behavior. I can look at an addict with scorn and disgust or look at them with compassion for a person who's in bondage. I won't let an addict live in my home; I have a child to protect. But I can offer prayers and support and a ride to rehab or whatever.

[lionfamily1999]

I'm reading "Mother of Pearl" and at one point a woman says:

 

Mean is mean. And a woman mean is weak, not strong.

Most women get so caught up in meanness, they forget

what they goin' after in the first place. Besides, who in

the world said wh*res don't need kindness? Who you think

God's gonna look down on--the whore or the one who

hates the wh*re?

 

 

 

 

Really, it goes with the moat in one person's eye/plank in your own. When we judge, we create the mechanism for our own judgement, the ruler to measure our own sin. And when you think about it along those ^ lines, it seems, imo, much clearer. Who's worse, the sinner or the Christian who hates them for it?

 

 

[Greta]

I think more that Judgment is meant to bring about justice. Since You are the only person you can change, you don't necessarily bring about personal judgment, as much as you are the only person on Earth that can really, honestly, Know Your Own Heart. No one else is in the position to do that. As a result, you are the only person to bring about personal change. That is a uniqueness of our individuality. Does that make sense. I'm not saying it well.

 

On the contrary, you said it very well! I appreciate that explanation very much. Makes perfect sense.

 

 

I think that means, try to help, but don't stagnate there, don't let a non-believer keep you spinning tires in one spot, when there's work for you elsewhere.

 

That makes sense too.

 

It seems for every answer there's a million new questions.

 

Yeah, story of my life! :)

 

I can look at an addict with scorn and disgust or look at them with compassion for a person who's in bondage. I won't let an addict live in my home; I have a child to protect. But I can offer prayers and support and a ride to rehab or whatever.

 

(emphasis mine) Thank you. That's what I was trying to get at, but you said it so much better! And, just to be very clear, I'm not saying I'm a great example of that. I'm only saying that the need to do that has become more clear to me of late. :001_smile:

[senunk]

In Matt 18:15-17, Jesus was speaking to His disciples about how to deal with those who offend in the church. "Men of the nations" would be another way of refering to gentiles, or more specifically, unbelievers. Unbelievers do not have fellowship in the body of Christ. Any believer who behaves "woefully" (without repentence) will treated as an unbeliever...shunned from inclusion in body-fellowship. However, this does not carry "condemnation". If the offending party repents, they may be received back into fellowship. Even though the church has authority to discipline it's members, God alone judges him. In other words, any misjudgement made by the church, will be judged rightly by God.

 

I haven't read all the threads, but I agree with this. Paul is talking about those in the church who aren't behaving as Christians. As far as eating goes, I believe this to mean the Lord's Supper (communion). This was originally done as a shared meal, as was not to be taken lightly. The early church met as an assembly of believers and they went out to the unbelievers. 'Church' wasn't a time to convert people. It was a time to equip and teach believers. Spending time with and blessing unbelievers outside 'church' and living a quiet and holy life is how they showed and shared Christ's love to others. There are two different words that get translated at 'judge'. One means condemn and one means to sift through. I think...it's been a while since I did a study on the word 'judge'. It is God's job to condemn, not ours. It is our job to sift through stuff, hold on to what is good and refuse what isn't.

[Lovedtodeath]

Wow, I am just now reading replies and not getting very far... I feel like I have not expressed myself well.

upon confession or discovery of something unethical or sinful in nature, will be asked to leave the leadership position for 2 years time. They are asked to spend 6 weeks of it in retreat, preferably as a family or at least husband and wife if married. After this time to reflect, repent, and self discover, along with a "rehabilition" time of the 2 years, the pastor is welcome back as a leader. He is allowed to attend the church at all times, and is always allowed the support of the congretation, but in a sense, he is "banished" for the 6 weeks to really reflect on his life. This is what I think Paul means.

Exactly, as right in the next book of the Bible Paul is telling the congregation to (2 Corinthians 2:7) kindly forgive and comfort such a man.

 

Any believer who behaves "woefully" (without repentence) will treated as an unbeliever...shunned from inclusion in body-fellowship. However, this does not carry "condemnation". If the offending party repents, they may be received back into fellowship. Even though the church has authority to discipline it's members, God alone judges him. In other words, any misjudgement made by the church, will be judged rightly by God.

I didn't word my OP correctly. I mean that Jesus did indeed condemn people. In the other thread, the sentiment was that Jesus forgave, accepted and loved everyone no matter what. I believe that his followers do not judge, but Jesus does. Edited July 24, 2009 by Lovedtodeath

[kmacnchs]

"Matthew 18:14 Likewise it is not a desirable thing with my Father who is in heaven for one of these little ones to perish.

15 “Moreover, if your brother commits a sin, go lay bare his fault between you and him alone. If he listens to you, you have gained your brother. 16 But if he does not listen, take along with you one or two more, in order that at the mouth of two or three witnesses every matter may be established. 17 If he does not listen to them, speak to the congregation. If he does not listen even to the congregation, let him be to you just as a man of the nations and as a tax collector."

 

They also referred to tax collectors as sinners. A man of the nations would be a pagan. So, in today's terms, it would be a NON-BELIEVER.

 

We have done church discipline like this a number of times in our church. It is only done to members and before becoming a member, you have to decide whether you are willing to be confronted if you are living in sin...I CERTAINLY would.Anyway, when the person has not listened to one person or two people, or the church, they have been treated as an unbeliever. Do we alienate unbelievers? Certainly not! We befriend them, love them, share God's Word with them. As an unbeliever, they are not invited to be a leader in the church in any form (teacher, elder, etc), not invited to share in communion, etc. And when that person repents to God and turns away from their life of sin, they are welcomed back as a believer and there is a grand celebration (that has happened in every instance as well).

 

I do not agree with churches "banishing" people...is that what we do to unbelievers? NO! How are they going to reconcile if you have no contact with them?

[Lovedtodeath]

You're right; Jesus loves sinners. They're the only ones He died for. ;) I was trying to point out, though, that often in this day and time people (in general) focus on the "god is LOVE" and interpret that as meaning it doesn't matter what we do, we're all going to heaven and be one big happy family in an eternal love-in. That's just not what the gospel says.

 

And, you're right again; it is really about how we view other people and it is difficult at times to draw the line between love and exposing yourself and condoning ongoing sinful patterns of behavior. I can look at an addict with scorn and disgust or look at them with compassion for a person who's in bondage. I won't let an addict live in my home; I have a child to protect. But I can offer prayers and support and a ride to rehab or whatever.

:iagree:

[Orthodox6]

One of the titles of honor given to Christ is "The Righteous Judge".

 

What I am picking up, however, is that you appear to have an extremely difficult time accepting that there are Christian groups that teach explicitly that "Jesus forgives, accepts, and loves EVERYONE no matter what." Somehow I end up with the impression that you believe that these characteristics of Jesus means that He, resultantly, would have an "anything goes" attitude. As a member of a Church which teaches what I am writing, I can assure you that Christ does NOT, "approve" of sin. His love for everybody, however, does not contradict this.

 

Unconditional love of the kind freely given to EVERYONE at all times by God is beyond human comprehension. Human beings cannot, by themselves, love like that. Only with Christ within us does it approach and become possible.

 

I know how hard it can be to express oneself clearly on the Internet. So I still may not be following your thoughts as you hold them.

 

 

I mean that Jesus did indeed condemn people. In the other thread, the sentiment was that Jesus forgave, accepted and loved everyone no matter what. I believe that his followers do not judge, but Jesus does.

[Lovedtodeath]

One of the titles of honor given to Christ is "The Righteous Judge".

 

What I am picking up, however, is that you appear to have an extremely difficult time accepting that there are Christian groups that teach explicitly that "Jesus forgives, accepts, and loves EVERYONE no matter what." Somehow I end up with the impression that you believe that these characteristics of Jesus means that He, resultantly, would have an "anything goes" attitude. As a member of a Church which teaches what I am writing, I can assure you that Christ does NOT, "approve" of sin. His love for everybody, however, does not contradict this.

 

Unconditional love of the kind freely given to EVERYONE at all times by God is beyond human comprehension. Human beings cannot, by themselves, love like that. Only with Christ within us does it approach and become possible.

 

I know how hard it can be to express oneself clearly on the Internet. So I still may not be following your thoughts as you hold them.

Thanks. I am distracted and feeling unwell, so bare with my terrible wording and ineloquence. Actually, what I have a problem with is when people who try to follow Christ (I sure try) or those who don't follow Christ (either/or) use the love of God and Jesus as a way to condone sin or force other people into friendship with sinners. It seems like I see the attitude that someone can commit adultery one day and then I am expected to show love by associating closely with them the next. Or someone who does not share my values as a Christian should be welcomed as my best friend in the name of love. In reality, if someone does not share my values and allows their children to date young, smokes, uses drugs, or acts promiscuisly, I will guard my heart by noting that "bad association spoils useful habits". But I will not be looking my nose down at them or wishing them to suffer.

 

I think that the love of Christ is very much like we love our children. We will love them no matter what, but sometimes their lifestyle takes them away from us, and we aren't going to accept that lifestyle in order to "prove" that we love them.

 

My thoughts as to judging and loving have been said very, very well by previous posts. :) SolaMichella, Julie and Tina come to mind.

Edited July 24, 2009 by Lovedtodeath

[lionfamily1999]

Thanks. I am distracted and feeling unwell, so bare with my terrible wording and ineloquence. Actually, what I have a problem with is when people who try to follow Christ (I sure try) or those who don't follow Christ (either/or) use the love of God and Jesus as a way to condone sin or force other people into friendship with sinners. It seems like I see the attitude that someone can commit adultery one day and then I am expected to show love by associating closely with them the next.

 

I think that the love of Christ is very much like we love our children. We will love them no matter what, but sometimes their lifestyle takes them away from us, and we aren't going to accept that lifestyle in order to "prove" that we love them.

 

My thoughts as to judging and loving have been said very, very well by previous posts. :) SolaMichella, Julie and Tina come to mind.

:grouphug: I hope you feel better soon, and thank you for the compliment.

 

I do agree that people use the 'love your neighbor' as a way to make Christians appear hypocritical in their treatment of certain situations. I can love you, even if you're wrong. I can love you and say, no, I will not help.

 

It's funny, because everyone agrees on tough love for some subjects, but others... well, they see tough love as something other than love and it's not.

[Lovedtodeath]

ITA Julie...

 

and just FYI: I was the one who commited adultery. I did so repeatedly and my mind and heart were in the wrong place. I was disciplined. I was shunned. I repented, I grew tremendously in my relationship with God, and being shunned was very much tough love. It got my mind into the right place, understanding my wrong instead of excusing it.

 

KWIM?

[MamaChristina]

I think it all boils down to hating the sin, BUT loving the sinner. I think everyone should read Richard Wurmbrandts "Tortured for Christ" and some of his other books. Here is a clear presentation of how a Christian should love their enemies while hating their sin. While Communist thugs had him in prison, starving him and beating him, he prayed for them and only wanted their salvation. Over and over again he said how he hates communism, but loves Communists. He lovingly shared Christ with them knowing that it would lead to more beating or even death. Many were saved by his example, especially when the paranoid party kept throwing their own officials in prison after someone else informed against them.

 

I do see a different precident set in Scripture when it comes to saved folks who are stubbornly and consistently sinning and hurting the body of Christ. If we love them we will exhort them in love. If they refuse to change, they should be left ALONE in their sin, till they see the light. If they repent they should lovingly be brought back into the fold.

 

Just my thoughts, for what it's worth.

 

Christina

[lionfamily1999]

ITA Julie...

 

and just FYI: I was the one who commited adultery. I did so repeatedly and my mind and heart were in the wrong place. I was disciplined. I was shunned. I repented, I grew tremendously in my relationship with God, and being shunned was very much tough love. It got my mind into the right place, understanding my wrong instead of excusing it.

 

KWIM?

Me too, only there was just one example (hi dd).

 

I understand it, understood it then although I was incredibly upset to see the girls who'd had abortions continuing on in church.

 

Sometimes, the only way to see the light is if people stop pointing it at you, iykwIm.

[Orthodox6]

You are not at all "ineloquent" ! I have benefited from this thread, and the original one, for I always learn more about the people with whom I am associating, and how they think.

 

My idiosyncratic "problem" with religious threads is when people go on auto-pilot and trot out the "Remove the log/plank from your own eye" passage, say nothing further and, instead, come across as being unwilling to think through a topic. Usually, when I see that quotation, I stop reading a post !

 

 

 

Thanks. I am distracted and feeling unwell, so bare with my terrible wording and ineloquence. Actually, what I have a problem with is when people who try to follow Christ (I sure try) or those who don't follow Christ (either/or) use the love of God and Jesus as a way to condone sin or force other people into friendship with sinners. It seems like I see the attitude that someone can commit adultery one day and then I am expected to show love by associating closely with them the next. Or someone who does not share my values as a Christian should be welcomed as my best friend in the name of love. In reality, if someone does not share my values and allows their children to date young, smokes, uses drugs, or acts promiscuisly, I will guard my heart by noting that "bad association spoils useful habits". But I will not be looking my nose down at them or wishing them to suffer.

 

I think that the love of Christ is very much like we love our children. We will love them no matter what, but sometimes their lifestyle takes them away from us, and we aren't going to accept that lifestyle in order to "prove" that we love them.

 

My thoughts as to judging and loving have been said very, very well by previous posts. :) SolaMichella, Julie and Tina come to mind.

[NancyNellen]

Just don't forget, Greta, that the most important commandment is "to love the Lord God with all your heart, soul, mind, and strength." The second most important commandment is "to love your neighbor as yourself."

 

I believe the modern day church frequently inverts those two most important commands, loving unbelievers at all costs, and bending the Word of God to do so (in a most un-loving way toward Him). Remember, He said,

 

"If you love me, you will keep my commandments." (John 14:15) So we need to KNOW His commandments by knowing His Word. Not bending it to suit our earthly desires or misconceptions. (I am not saying you specifically are doing this, but that this is running rampant in our church today.)

[Greta]

Just don't forget, Greta, that the most important commandment is "to love the Lord God with all your heart, soul, mind, and strength." The second most important commandment is "to love your neighbor as yourself."

 

Point taken. I left it simply at "to love" to keep my post succinct, but I appreciate your clarification.

[mcconnellboys]

Well, you say, "I don't think that all sins are equal."

 

But I would gently suggest to you that God has told us that he does consider all sin the same. And that we all are sinners. Period. Not big sinners and little sinners; not white lie sinners and adulterous sinners - just sinners.

 

I know the last verse you quote is often used by congregations to put someone out if they feel that person is in a state of sin and refuses to be unrepentent. And you ask, "How did they treat men of the nations and tax collectors?"

 

I believe we know that Jew and Gentile were generally at odds; that adherrent to the law and breaker of the law were usually at odds. That's how "they" treated others - and how we still all too often treat those who we perceive as "less good" than ourselves today.

 

However, we also know how Jesus treated men of the nations and tax collectors and prostitutes and little, bothersome children, and lepers, the possessed, the dead, the poor, the thief, etc. And we know that we are told all sin is the same. And we are all sinners, saved by grace alone. None is sufficiently holy enough to see God's face, save for the perfect sacrifice of our Saviour, who humbled Himself for the sake of ALL. But for Him, our sin (all of us) has condemned us all to death.

 

And we know that no one comes to the Father save through the Son, who has told us to love our neighbor AS ourself. So how do we go about doing that? Is there anyone unworthy of love? Is there anyone who God does not love?

 

If God loves us all equally, despite our sin (which is all the same to Him), then how do we have the audacity not to try (we will certainly fail at it, but try) to do the same?

[mcconnellboys]

No, I don't think you are being told by the Bible to be an enabler. Anyone with an alcoholic or other problem family member knows that enabling the problem just allows it to fester and infect others more and for a longer period of time. I don't think God is against tough love, which all parents tend to administer from time to time, too. How did Jesus treat the money changers in the temple? The Pharisees, who knew the law perhaps better than anyone?

 

I think a minister who works with my church group said something that explains this concept well for me. He visits with prisoners at a local jail on a weekly basis. He recently went to see someone who messed up and was back in jail after just being released. He plainly told the person, who asked him if he could get him any help, "No". He said he was sorry, but he would have to pay the consequence for his actions. However, he told him that he continues to love and pray for him and that there is the good news of the gospel promised to him whenever he wants to embrace it. He's not going to help him be bad; he's not going to pretend he didn't do wrong. But he will continue to hold out the hope of Christ to him.

 

I absolutely don't think you have to embrace or accept an adulterer, someone who has poor moral values, etc. If you need to deal with them on a regular basis, in church groups, through volunteer activities, etc., then you need to have frank discussion with them and let them know in no uncertain terms that you are unhappy with xyz behavior of theirs; that you will pray for them; that you cannot be sure whether or not you trust them until they've proven themselves somewhat to you, etc. Be honest. God does not ask us to ignore inappropriate behavior, He asks us to love in spite of it. Loving someone who has done wrong does not mean acting as if they did not do wrong. It means openly discussing the wrong and your expectations for their recovery from that wrong; offering your honest prayers for their healing, etc.

[TXMomof4]

I answered this is the other thread, but I'll post it here too :)

 

I think we're meant to love everyone, but that does not mean that we have to be friends with them. IOW, love your neighbor, but if your neighbor is a drug abuser, love them from a distance. Let them borrow eggs and milk and don't expect to get it back. Show them the love that Jesus told us to have and help them when you can, but that does not mean you have to let them move in or help them shoot up. You don't have to drive them to their dealer's house or become an accessory to their crimes. You pray for them and you help them in every Christian way you can, you just don't allow them to drag you into their sin.

 

It makes sense to me anyway ;)

 

That makes perfect sense to me. In fact, I used those words (bolded above) almost exactly this last week. Loving your neighbor isn't an ooey gooey lovey feeling. It's an action. The particular person I was speaking of was a fellow Christian. Who makes. me. nuts. I can't stand being in the same room with her. But if she ever needed anything - I would help her in a heart beat. We clash, but I love her.

 

The person down the street, I don't know enough about to even decide if I like them, but I can love them. When the ambulance came to their house, we went and checked to see if they were ok and if there was anything I could do. When the lady at the grocery store accosted me wanting money to pay her rent, I put her in touch with someone who could help her financially (since I wasn't in the position to do so myself). It isn't how I feel about a person, it's how I act toward a person. It doesn't matter if they're dirty, stinky drunks picking through the trash can - they deserve the same compassion Jesus gave me. It may be financial, it may just be a kind word - but it comes from a heart of love. The trashy looking girl sitting at McDonalds deserves my kindness as much (or more so) than the perfectly put together girl sitting in a different booth. I think that's where we fail so often, we do judge on appearance.

 

So, if that girl at McDonalds turns out to have a less than moral lifestyle, do I dump her unless she promises to change? Nope. I keep loving her anyway. Of course, my job as a parent is to protect my children. I wouldn't put them in a position that could endanger them, but it's important for them to know that God loves that woman as much as he does me. And the only way she might ever know God is through my actions. Very important to me that my kids know that. So, maybe it's meeting for lunch somewhere or inviting her to the park with us. It's probably not going to be inviting her to my home initially. I owe that safe haven to my children. But hopefully, as the relationship grows it is inviting her to my home, once there is some trust built.

 

It's so much easier on paper, but it's my ideal. It's my goal.

[Lovedtodeath]

Matthew 18:14 Likewise it is not a desirable thing with my Father who is in heaven for one of these little ones to perish.

15 “Moreover, if your brother commits a sin, go lay bare his fault between you and him alone. If he listens to you, you have gained your brother. 16 But if he does not listen, take along with you one or two more, in order that at the mouth of two or three witnesses every matter may be established. 17 If he does not listen to them, speak to the congregation. If he does not listen even to the congregation, let him be to you just as a man of the nations and as a tax collector.

 

If Jesus were telling us to treat them just like anyone else then he wouldn't have said it at all. :confused:

However, we also know how Jesus treated men of the nations and tax collectors and prostitutes and little, bothersome children, and lepers, the possessed, the dead, the poor, the thief, etc. And we know that we are told all sin is the same. And we are all sinners, saved by grace alone. None is sufficiently holy enough to see God's face, save for the perfect sacrifice of our Saviour, who humbled Himself for the sake of ALL. But for Him, our sin (all of us) has condemned us all to death.

 

And we know that no one comes to the Father save through the Son, who has told us to love our neighbor AS ourself. So how do we go about doing that? Is there anyone unworthy of love? Is there anyone who God does not love?

 

If God loves us all equally, despite our sin (which is all the same to Him), then how do we have the audacity not to try (we will certainly fail at it, but try) to do the same?

 

God did have favorites: Job, Abraham, David... Jesus had favorites: the 12 Apostles, Peter, James and John especially, the one that he told to take care of his mother. Just thinking out loud.

 

I appreciate what you have to say, and noticed you had two posts that seemed very different.