Love With All Emotion, Intellect, Subconsciousness and Strength

4 "Hear, O Israel! The LORD is our God, the LORD is one!

5 "You shall love the LORD your God with all your heart and with all your soul and with all your might.

God always reveals himself. Sometimes it is in a way that intrigues. Sometimes He reveals himself in such a manner that it fascinates and captivates the seeker. He finds himself compelled to want to more fully understand what the Spirit has revealed to him about God.

the Shema

Although the pronouncement of the Shema of Deuteronomy 6 is arguably the preamble of the monotheist claims of Christians, Jews and Muslims it is also, I believe, one of the most misunderstood revelations about the Lord [who] is one. Merely calling out “God is one!” “Allah is Great!” or “Jesus is Lord!” can make for great soundbites and slogans believed by those who profess them, but this does not equate to an understanding of God.

Read More

The Image of Racism

the image of racism

Racists, despite their false bravado, live a lie which grovels in fear. Note that I refer to racists as individuals or groups and not in the formless, disembodied barroom, coffeehouse, sports field or classroom topic label of racism. It is the image touted by some who themselves are not given to talk much less think about those things they boast arrogantly. I am compelled to speak, as much as I am embarrassed and ashamed to admit it, on racism because of the act of racism which resulted in the murder of the saints in Christ in Charleston South Carolina. I do not speak because they are my brothers and sisters in Christ who were murdered. Rather, this is what I, to say nothing about anyone else, ought to do anytime I am truly moved in my heart by such acts. Even more than waiting for the next and latest act of racial violence I ought to be able to respond in the affirmative to the question which comes up at times such as in Charleston: Do we Americans engage in talk about racism? Even more, I as a Christian, need to initiate and engage in the discussion in the times in between those abominable acts of racial violence. Do not think you have acted or spoken against racism simply by keeping quiet and thereby think that everyone can and should assume that you are not racist.

Read More

Gender Change and The Image of Male and Female

Jeopardy answer clue: The image of male and female.

what I wanna be

This is a brief article on the subject of image. Specifically, it is an invitation to discuss or to ponder the current embrace and practice involving the change of gender image. The embrace and practice of gender change, as it is purported, is counseled and prescribed in school, church and home. It is counseled not as a solution necessarily for those souls afflicted and sometimes ravished either physically by others or psychologically and emotionally by their own self-image  because of the gender of their birth. Image change is driven by mainstream media especially when a well known celebrity like Bruce Jenner declares his own decision to undergo the physically outward and inward emotional, psychological behavior change of image. Jenner recently left the male gender with which he was born for the female gender he has embraced for himself.

While this discussion topic may upset or even stir or provoke some to anger there is no condemnation or castigation here. What I would like to bring out is the questionable integrity and honesty of the therapeutic and cultural responses given to those who face their own struggles concerning their image. This change of image is real and practically attainable for a few. However, the reality is one which eludes many others. This makes them neither poor nor victims. However, they are the ones for whom a real resolution is not only readily and practically attainable but it is the imperative option for their own peace and joy in life. The very limited economic resources at their disposal position them with the luxury of being able to take the time, if only they would, to understand image in general and their own personal image. The attainability of that peace and joy in gender is not found in the surgeon’s scalpel, anymore than weight loss is found in pills. It is found in an understanding of their own which is within their reach.

showcase examples

There is a track record of mistaken notions offered in our schools, churches and by parents as solutions or makeshift arrangements some of which were plainly wrong. Some have fostered or enabled behaviors detrimental to the individual. Still others were inconsistent and downright hypocritical with tenets of love and happiness by those who counseled, promoted and urged image change. Some of these mistaken notions include sex education programs; that social experiment in education which quickly deviated from its core to include sex techniques and sexual behavior. Although I was in grade school long before the drive to remove prayer from schools rolled through school campuses the track marks of these two, sex education and prayer, are showcase examples of an education curriculum and policies gone awry. My reason for citing these is not for any moral reasons, but rather to point out what these have produced in terms of school age pregnancies and the erosion in the emotional and mental well-being of students such that shootings have become a way of life _ and death, on school campuses whose focus on education and knowledge was lost long ago. The message from the church concerning image is often as poor and founded on mistaken notions which do nothing to enlighten and lift up those who struggle with a biblical understanding of image. Of course, the culture catch-phrase is for "everyone to just be happy." Often parents, wittingly or unwittingly, are parties to image change with either school or church, or worse yet and as a show of their detachment and lack of awareness, neither one.

You might think the above as showcase examples are laughable. Yet, we ought not think the approval of suicide as an improbable reality which would ever be encouraged and taught in school and church alike. Do not expect these things to be taught overtly at the beginning, but the message is in our society already. As Americans become more open to assisted suicide one cannot rule out the day when the likelihood of allowing and encouraging students who choose to do so to commit suicide, after all as goes the default, weak and amoral cultural response, it is their choice. Suicide was the option exercised by the 1999 Columbine students but only after they had murdered several of their peers. The suicide mold has been cast. It is neither new nor is it a stretch to mention it in the context of the discussion on image.

Anyone who can see and acknowledge this current upsurge should not rule out the real probability of change in the therapist’s counsel involving gender image. It would not be a leap to include the encouragement of those whom they counsel and encourage along with their embrace of gender change as well as to encourage suicide as just another choice option. It is not a stretch especially when one ponders the previously mentioned sex education and prayer.

no hope, no love

Here is the inconsistency, falsehood and hypocrisy behind the purported counselors' message of love for those who struggle with their gender image and those who struggle with suicide, namely, that there is no hope to cope. Suicide is as readily available and easy to embrace as to alter one’s image.

Thus far, thanks be to God and his grace, the option of suicide, particularly of our youth, has not yet come to be prescribed in the same manner as image change. What has love, as Tina Turner fired off, got to do with it? The bottom line is that the deceptive message of the counselors is devoid of love because there is no hope and in the absence of hope whatever option, whether suicide or gender change, are equally suitable and acceptable alternative responses to life’s struggles. Jesus said,

The thief comes only  to steal and kill and destroy; I came that they may have life, and have it abundantly.

Today, men, women, boys and girls and children as young as three and four years old are ushered and rushed along in their expressed desire for a new gender image by schools, churches, friends and family. This is what they can expect the moment they declare they have always felt or have recently come to realize they are at heart a gender other than that into which they were born. Too often in these instances even the therapeutic counseling is waived as unnecessary. It is akin to what is too often heard in crime investigations by the police. The instant the police receive a confession, never mind the tactics by which that confession is often obtained from the suspect, any further investigation is deemed unnecessary and is abandoned. How many times has the public learned afterwards about how the police ignored and refused an further investigation of the crime as unnecessary because they had a confession. It is the same as that moment when an individual, regardless of age, states he wants to be a she or she wants to be a he.

It used to be when a child was asked what did he or she wanted to be their answer might have been a profession or vocation perhaps similar to that of their parents. Even then, as those children grew up and earned their livelihood in those professions it was something which they did, not something which they had become. (More on this later*.) Their performance in their respective fields was only a partial picture of the overall meaning and fulfillment of their lives.

Genesis: in the beginning there was . . . image

Regardless whether or not one believes or accepts the scriptures in Genesis 1 and 2 there is a significant point of reference to examine on the subject of image. It is significant because it involves the beginning of life, or image at the time of birth. Whatever one might think or decide to do to change their image the fact stands that they were born with a particular image.

Notice that this image as it is mentioned in the scriptures has nothing to do with the masculine or feminine gender.

the image of male and female

The first reference in the account of creation in the scriptures about any attribute of man is significant. It ought at least be a matter of curiosity for the nonbeliever. There is a prior introduction of the male and female in chapter one with the flesh and bone reference spoken by Adam when his eyes first saw Eve. Yet, it is the testimony of God when the scripture declares that God,

created man in His own image, in the image of God He created him;male and female He created them

which speaks even to our present times.

Specifically, and despite the modern presumption and primary obsession of image as involves the outward physical appearance, this is not what is implied by the passage. Any inference drawn from the passage which involves a physical aspect cannot be reconciled or harmonized with the passage because whatever that image of God which man shares with God, the differences in male and female anatomy such as some of the more overt breasts and genitalia make it evident that the image of which God spoke is not primarily a physical one.

homosexuality and gender image: different and alike

In this respect image as it involves gender is similar to homosexuality in that it too is a matter-of-fact contradiction of one’s own birth; a birth, regardless of one’s beliefs, which is as undeniable as one’s gender at the time of birth. One, whether male or female, was neither conceived nor born as the result of the sexual union of male and male anymore than one was conceived or born as the result of the female and female sexual union.

Despite the claims of joy of coming out into public openness, as homosexuals once were given to saying when they declared their sexual preference, likes, choice, etc., the honesty and love are quite arguably questionable. How you might ask? It is because of the unwillingness or inability to express the convictions of their decision which cannot be coherently or comprehensively conveyed through teaching. The only resort of any attempt to explain and teach one’s decision or life-choice is existentialism. The homosexual experience is only similar to that of the existentialist; it is not existential because like the existentialist's experience it is limited to the one time experience and cannot be expressed nor repeated. It is different in that the sexual acts which typify homosexuality are repeatable and though there is some semblance of explanation it is of no significance or consequence because it is rooted in the carnal, sexual pleasures of homosexuality and is limited to self experience and a significant other who is equally unable to express coherently an experience of carnal satisfaction. In other words, anyone who wants to understand it must experience it. Explanation and teaching outside of that relationship to anyone else is as inept as it is unnecessary. More bluntly and as is heard; it's nobody's business.

the new birth

The new birth of faith in Jesus is unlike that experience. It can be coherently explained. The decision which resulted in the transformation of one's life is one which is displayed day after day. It is not a obscure mystery which cannot be understood. It is not, unlike the claim of LGBT advocates, something which the believer could not help and just allow to happen because they were just born that way. It is a transformation which began with the realization and acceptance of that believer's own sin and the decision to put their faith and trust in Jesus as Lord and Savior.

the purpose of image

It is a popular practice for people to post online images to represent themselves which are not necessarily true; a photo of a female or an adult does not necessarily follow that the person is female or an adult. Whether for security reasons or humorous reasons some people disguise their gender or location. (Trolls are not in discussion here.) Of course, this online altering of one’s online virtual image did not begin with the world wide web. It is not limited to the internet. People have been encouraged to alter or change their actual image so as to obscure their identity through behavior, particularly if they feel threatened or they do not feel happy with themselves. It is only until recently that the practice of altering one’s physical image has been embraced by some people as a solution to struggles with which they are not able to cope.

Does image serve a purpose other than a mere visible appearance? While an image is a representation and not the actual thing or the person it represents it’s use is intended to be true. It is not intended to deceive or mislead. One of the purposes of image, such as a photograph, is to widen the awareness of the actual person beyond the limited capabilities of the person because they can only be at one place at a time.

Generally, images are imprinted on money currencies. These images serve to remind the citizens of that nation and inform others who reside or travel in that country of those things which the people of that country cherish and value as part of their origins and history. Some of those images are pronouncements of faith and unity. Some images may have vague or obscure origins and meanings such as a fish with Greek letter characters, (ichthus, from the Greek ikhthýs (ἰχθύς, "fish" [fyi: Each one of five Greek letters form a Christian theological acrostic message: Ἰησοῦς (Jesus) Χριστός, (Christ) Θεοῦ (of God) Υἱός, (son) Σωτήρ (savior)]) but often there are prominent images which are as undeniable as they are readily identifiable, for example, the images of George Washington or Benjamin Franklin.

People sometimes carry with them or keep photographs and other images in their home. Those images may be of themselves, such as in a driver licence, or photographs and paintings of family and friends. The purpose of images is that they be discernible even by strangers who have no knowledge of the people in those images even when the original which is represented by the image has become lost and forgotten.

the consequences of a lost image

The Genesis Bible account concerning Cain, who murdered his brother Abel, reveals the antiquity behind the current trend to embrace the alteration of one’s image. Here is a very brief account concerning the fading and fast eroding image of Cain in what is the first private one-on-one therapeutic counseling session between God and Cain. The erosion of Cain’s image probably began even before Cain became upset because God had accepted Abel’s sacrifice but God had rejected Cain’s sacrifice. The displeasure was evident in his face. God counseled Cain on the matter which was troubling Cain. The record does not reflect anything spoken by Cain. This was God’s counsel for Cain:

If you do well, will not your countenance be lifted up? And if you do not do well, sin is crouching at the door; and its desire is for you, but you must master it.

Clearly, God’s counseling was not accepted by Cain. Yes, the counseling session, from a human standpoint, was a failure. Subsequently, Cain rose up and murdered his brother Abel when they were out in the field. What followed immediately afterwards was that the reticent Cain was confronted by God. Cain’s reticence gave way momentarily to a flash of denial, anger and sarcasm in response to God’s question, Where is your brother?

I don’t know. Am I my brother’s keeper?

Here, then, is Cain’s reaction to God’s punishment of Cain:

Cain said to the LORD, "My punishment is too great to bear! 14"Behold, You have driven me this day from the face of the ground; and from Your face I will be hidden, and I will be a vagrant and a wanderer on the earth, and whoever finds me will kill me."

Here is God’s response to Cain’s outcry:

But the LORD said to him, "Not so; anyone who kills Cain will suffer vengeance seven times over." Then the LORD put a mark on Cain so that no one who found him would kill him.

How does the account of Cain pertain or relate to the importance of image and the alteration of image? How did Cain get to the point where he lost his own image?

First, notice the distortion, despair and fear. God did not drive Cain away anywhere. Second, there is a two-fold anxiety which gripped Cain. a) He was sure that God’s face would be hidden from Cain (a mistaken notion of Cain’s own imagination) and not that Cain would hide, but that b) Cain would not be able to see God. 3) He feared being killed. Nothing of what Cain imagined and expected in the aftermath of the murder of his brother Abel is anything unknown or different than what people imagine or experience for themselves today. Cain's image of himself was a reflection of what he 1) never understood, 2) understood but forgot, or 3) understood, remembered, but rejected. What was it that Cain rejected?

conclusion: love

The Jeopardy game clue; The image of male and female. Answer: Who is God? What then is the image of God in which he created the male and female? What was the image which Adam, Eve, Abel and Cain shared? It is most certainly not a physical characteristic. It is what Adam and Eve, the male and female shared with each other and which was what made them in the image of God. It is love. Clearly, this love was so faded and eroded in Cain's heart that he was able to bring himself and allow himself to murder his brother Abel.

Love is the image of God in which God created the male and the female.

Certainly, there are various other attributes which define or which enable one to understand and know God, but love is foremost. Although love is not mentioned and does not appear in the Genesis creation passage it was the love of God by which God was able to punish Adam and Eve as well as Cain later not with ruthlessness nor mercilessness. The entirety of the revelation of the will of God as is presented in the scriptures is the love of God towards man, namely, to redeem or to free man from the bondage of sin and all manner of deception by which mankind and his image which mankind shares in common with God has been marred and damaged.

The first appearance of the word love in the scriptures in Genesis 22 is as likely to be warped, distorted and misunderstood as the love which it portends in John 3:16. What Jesus fulfilled when he came into the world goes back to what I mentioned earlier* in the section entitled, no hope, no love. Here is how the apostle Paul stated it in II Corinthians 5:21.

He made Him who knew no sin to be sin on our behalf,so that we might become the righteousness of God in Him.

When a disciple of Jesus looks into the mirror he/she may look no more like righteousness than Jesus looked like sin, but that is what he/she has become because of what Jesus was made. Clearly, this is the radical transformation, re-invigoration of image lost, not a physical image, but the image of love which is God (I John 4:16) and which male and female share with him. It is an image easily overlooked and even dismissed when our focus is upon ourselves in our outward physical bodies and not on Jesus and the love of God. This is why Jesus made it clear that if your love and concern is more about one's love of parents, brothers and sisters and even one's own life than you can not be his disciple.

Be of good cheer. Let not your heart be troubled. Believe in Jesus.

Read More

Real things, unseen things

My purpose in this article is to express some thoughts about some things which are unseen, but which are unquestionably real. Especially, and no less to be included, are those things which are dismissed by some precisely because these things are unseen. I want to focus on some things in nature and in human experience through which we seek to gain an understanding of life around us. Often, nature and human experience are the basis for how we determine whether we will accept what we have learned and understood, that is: If we can see it it must be real or if we can not see it it must not be real. Here is a simple assertion: These unseen things are real. I want to focus on those similarly unseen human experiences such as love which humans express towards one another. Whether we like or dislike, reject and deny things merely because they are unseen it does not change the reality of these things. I want to frame these unseen things as the naturalist responds to these unseen matters.

There are two things which are common to every theist, atheist, man, woman, children, plant and animal alike. It is life and death. What life and death have in common is that they can not be seen. Yes, we can look at a living person or a dead person, but neither of these permit us to touch these with a finger and declare -this is life; this is death, definitively. The span between these life and death is filled with natural and human experiences which can not be seen, but the reality and effect of these remains unchanged regardless of one’s belief and understanding. Our understanding of what we learn may compel us to change in our mind, but it is our acceptance of what we have learned regardless of whether we like it or dislike it which prompts the transformation which begins in our mind.

the flippant dismissal of death

Their self-designated names differ and change from time to time. However, their belief,  (a word which conjures aversion and derision) or knowledge being the preferred term, with scientists, evolutionists, humanists, Darwinists, atheists and naturalists remains the same. It is the belief that there is nothing beyond the threshold of the unseen reality of death. It is the end. finito. nada mas. fin. Of course, naturalists and their brethren do not deny the existence or reality of death, but the flippant dismissal of death could as well be because death can not be subjected to empirical research: a way of gaining knowledge by means of direct and indirect observation or experience. (A close cousin of empirical research in terms of methodology and a bit more cerebral is epistemology. It is the investigation of what distinguishes justified belief from opinion. [It appears belief is an approved, accepted term provided it is qualified as justified.])

Empirical research and epistemology are no more the domain and property of naturalists anymore than faith is the domain and possession of theists.

air, emotions, death and the unseen

The problem with empirical research (itself, an invisible tool!) becomes readily apparent with something as essential to life and survival as air. It is invisible, but it can be felt. Even at that, it can be felt only when pressure causes our skin to feel the sensation in the wind. Water, which is visible, becomes invisible when it is vaporized. Yet, it can return to its liquid state or a solid in the form of ice. There is hardly an argument to any of these simple explanations from either side of the discussion as to the reality of these elements. What these elements reveal is the transformation of energy into different forms as scientists (science, from latin, scire, to know) informed us long ago.

Yes, emotions represent a human experience while air and water represent elements in nature. However, one key reason which might explain the naturalist’s null view of death devoid of any possibility of life beyond death is that death, like the emotions of love, joy and happiness, is unseen. Neither death nor emotions can be weighed or measured in accordance with empirical research. Here again, especially given the nature of emotions there is a quickness to dismiss emotions as totally unscientific. After all, emotions are erratic, fickle and not to be trusted, right?

pressing happiness

Still, there is little point in arguing that the euphoria of being happy (here’s a tune for your happiness) is a wonderful human emotional feeling. While happiness is not to be trusted anymore than any emotion as the basis for decision-making because of its erratic nature, nonetheless it is hard to suppress or deny the reality of happiness. Of course, there is no denying that naturalists can and do experience the unseen realities of death and happiness. But, when happiness is pressed, (not unlike death) like water into vapor to a higher plane a transformation occurs. Happiness transforms into love. It is no more to be dismissed than the transformation of matter.

Do you wonder by what high-level intelligence naturalists tout proudly their conclusion that something as non-intelligent as a water and other matter transforms into another state, but life and intelligence is annihilated completely?

the emotion of love

Love is a human emotion, too. Love, like water with its different forms and states, is a verb (action), but it is a noun, (place, person or thing) also. How can love be verified if it can not be weighed or measured?

If it can not be weighed or measured anymore than death does it, as the naturalist contends about death, cease to exist and slip into nothingness like death or because of death? Human nature reveals that it is sometimes easier for us to see and learn from what we see in other people, but there are things to learn just as well from inanimate nature. It is harder to see it in ourselves and even harder to accept what we learn especially when it raises a conflict with all our prior perceptions and conclusions.

“One, remember to look up at the stars and not down at your feet. Two, never give up work. Work gives you meaning and purpose and life is empty without it. Three, if you are lucky enough to find love, remember it is there and don't throw it away.” Stephen Hawking

If we have learned and have accepted how water, which one moment is visible and next moment is invisible and transforms into various states, - why is it inconceivable if love, or even intelligence, which are both invisible, should transform into another state and not merely cease to exist altogether as naturalists maintain?

We express and give love to a child without the child having to ask for our love. As children grow they too express and give love to their parents and others. So, what is it about the wonderfulness of love which one can express and give others and receive love and yet, a person can say they do not feel loved? Despite mutual, reciprocal love what is it that causes a person to feel the need to long and seek for something more than human love? Is it possible that as great as is love between humans there is a greater love?

One aspect of love which illustrates the development (yes, you can call it evolution) of love is when a child reaches that point in life where the love of their parents can no longer fill their need and desire to be loved. They seek love from and with another human being perhaps one with whom they will walk through life together the rest of their lives. As much as we desire to receive love we have the desire to love another and to love others. We can find ourselves the unwitting recipient (Yes, this can be bizarre, but lets think about this in a friendly, amicable way for the sake of discussion) of love and though the two may elect to to follow their life path separately the fact is love was revealed and made known. It may not have been mutual, but it was acknowledged without further ado.

first love

I have often posed this question to the saints in Christ: Do you know where the first reference to love occurs in the Bible?

2 He said, “Now take your son, your only son, whom you love, even Isaac, and go into the land of Moriah. Offer him there as a burnt offering on one of the mountains which I will tell you of.”

Even believers who may not know the verse may readily recognize the passage concerning the call of Abraham to offer up his son Isaac. (I anticipate and I am not ignorant of the familiar and typically angry reactions to this sacrifice. So, I will refer interested readers to my article on human sacrifice.) The birth of a son which had seemed an impossibility for Abraham to father had been born to Sarah and Abraham according to the promise of God. Now, God was calling Abraham to offer him up as a sacrifice. Long story short: Isaac was not sacrificed, literally, and the lessons are there for the learning of the saints. Those lessons are not in the scope of this article.

greater love

The significance in the sacrifice of Isaac is that it foreshadows the actual, literal fulfillment of love which is contained in a similar verse in the Bible.

For God so loved the world, that he gave his one and only Son, that whoever believes in him should not perish, but have eternal life. (John 3:16)

Once again, the above verse evokes in some people the urge to run away in a fit of rage, ridicule, anger or hysteria, but this does not negate, as has been said of unseen things, the reality of love. Whether or not we have seen it, as in because I was not there does not invalidate or negate the reality of love.

More specifically, that love to which John referred in the gospel was expressed, unsolicited and freely by Jesus, the Son of God. It may be a good starting point to consider that sacrifice as nothing more than just a man. Would love by just an ordinary man be any less worthy to be prized and valued as to evoke a thought or word of esteem? Even if nothing else, Hawking admonishes,  if you are lucky enough to find love, remember it is there and don't throw it away. The fact that you were not present does not necessarily invalidate that love and here is the test of such love:

Greater love has no one than this, that someone lay down his life for his friends.

The sacrifice of love by Jesus was not forced. It was the voluntary act of love with full awareness and full consciousness. It was the love which he pronounced during his entire life. He fulfilled it. There was never any denial of what he had done or accomplished in terms of his resurrection by those living and/or witnesses, friend and foe alike.

conclusion

There are things unseen in nature and in human experience. The essence of air, happiness, life and death are all unseen. Whether or not we are present to see, touch or feel those unseen things in nature or in human experience does not negate or invalidate of those things.

The naturalists’ flippant dismissal of death as the finite annihilation of life is driven by the illusive nature of the unseen, particularly death, to analysis and quantification. Their conclusion that death marks the annihilation of life into nothingness is counter intuitive to the empirical research approach. Scientists long ago noted that matter is not destroyed, but that it is merely transformed. This holds true of water which can transform from a visible state to an invisible state and back to solid or liquid form. Water is not annihilated or destroyed when it transforms into vapor. A thought is not annihilated or destroyed when it is expressed verbally as an idea. Death and life share a uniqueness. They are not repeatable experiences, but then neither are the big bang nor the theoretical stages of evolution.

Love is repeatable. Yet, the greatest prophesied and fulfillment of love as declared by Jesus is not repeatable. But if the big bang which occurred one time long ago with no human being present to observe it commands the scrutiny of human thought then love demands no less because it is the greatest testament of humans created in the image of God.

It is no small irony that God who is invisible and unseen, which is the reason men dismiss Him, took on the form of man to become visible to be seen and understood only to be rejected nonetheless. Why? Only because he looked too much like man, the creation of his own imagination? It goes back to what I stated at the beginning of this article about whether or not we will accept what we understand regardless of whether or not like or dislike it.

Peace in Jesus, Lord and Savior, the Son of God.

Read More

Jesus: Love & Hate

Recently, my attention was drawn by the LOVE/HATE format on an NFL program. Once again, I was struck by yet another instance of an attempt to bring together these two seemingly disparate opposites of good and evil even if it was in a sports program. Granted, that the sports program talk was detached (how ironic; it’s a violent contact sport) from any violence, but the semblance of love and hate in the broader context of culture is, arguably, just as detached from reality. It looks and sounds like what is of faith just enough to deceive those disciples who succumb to it.

the scope of this article

I have chosen as the scope of this article, lest anyone should cry foul, to place the burden of the oft heard claims and charges of love and hate in this article, actual or perceived, not on nonbelievers, but on my brothers and sisters in Christ. It's not because there is any truth or accuracy in those claims or those charges. Rather, it is because we who have believed in Jesus have grappled with, understood and accepted love and hate as spoken by Jesus - even if we sometimes forget the meaning and significance of those words. The perceptions and displays of love and hate by the saints in Christ for or against homosexuals and homosexuality is an opportunity to explore and challenge our understanding of love and hate.

the source of those perceptions

Regardless of how few or how many make up that group of brothers and sisters in the body of believers in the church who either accept, condone or practice homosexuality there is a need to understand the source of those perceptions and influences. Just what is the semblance of love and hate which has led them to that point? It requires something more than the manner of the world to let fly claims and charges flippantly. It is important to keep in mind that it is this group, my brothers and sisters of the faith that is in Christ Jesus, which makes up the content and context of this article. So, there will be no further need to repeat this clarification.

The ignorance and acceptance concerning homosexuality by the saints in Christ follows from the equally ignorant and mistaken understanding of love and hate from the scriptures. It is a direct influence of culture on the saints while simultaneously claiming to be disciples of Jesus. There is hardly, in the crossfire of those claims and charges, any more understanding than truth that one loves Jesus or that one hates homosexuals. Those who rail at others with their hate are as ugly and mistaken as those who deceptively shower with love others. Such seeming demonstrations of love are at the expense of a compromise. They represent a corruption of those things, namely the word of God; the scriptures, which they do know and do understand with respect to love and hate as revealed by Jesus and Paul.

love and hate in Jesus’ speech

Certainly, the New Testament writers did not dismiss, conceal or otherwise soften these words as spoken by Jesus into something other than what he intended. He spoke openly and candidly of love and hate; two words often peddled, stretched and distorted to the limit in the form of claims, charges and accusations, today.

What Jesus conveyed, with these words, was a discomforting concept with the intended single purpose, namely, to cause the would-be disciple, -alone and no one else-, to ponder for himself/herself what and who he/she loves more and hates less.

These two passages from Luke and Matthew relate the words on the call of Jesus for the would-be disciple, that is, a follower of Jesus, and what it costs to follow after Jesus.

“Don’t think that I came to send peace on the earth. I didn’t come to send peace, but a sword. 35  For I came to set a man at odds against his father, and a daughter against her mother, and a daughter-in-law against her mother-in-law. 36  A man’s foes will be those of his own household.✡ 37  He who loves father or mother more than me is not worthy of me; and he who loves son or daughter more than me isn’t worthy of me. 38  He who doesn’t take his cross and follow after me, isn’t worthy of me. 39  He who seeks his life will lose it; and he who loses his life for my sake will find it.  The gospel according to Matthew 20

25 Large crowds were traveling with Jesus, and turning to them he said: 26 “If anyone comes to me and does not hate father and mother, wife and children, brothers and sisters—yes, even their own life—such a person cannot be my disciple. 27 And whoever does not carry their cross and follow me cannot be my disciple. The gospel according to Luke, chapter 14

disciples succumb to the source

The tension in the words love and hate was captured by the NT writers, not as contradictions as some are quick to charge, but as a way of viewing and understanding the concept and meaning of discipleship in Jesus.

Neither, were these words spoken by Jesus to his disciples to elicit or incite animosity, disdain, hatred or violence on anyone in the faith that is in Christ Jesus or anyone outside of the love, grace and fellowship of the faithful in Jesus. (A disciple is a follower of Jesus.)

Today, love and hate are just another kernel pressed and mashed for mass consumption by culture in America as what is politically correct; as though love and hate were polemically and diametrically opposed to each other; nothing at all as Jesus spoke and meant those words. The politically correct claim (and an expectation to be heeded) is that the person who loves accepts, embraces and tolerates without question; this, as a show of diversity through unity. However, nothing could be farther from the truth.

There is no room for tolerance for personal convictions in culture. Conversely, the politically incorrect person who hates is that person who so much as says or does anything much less think of anything contrary to what has been established by culture. Culture does not have nor does it need the status or authority of legal or religious belief systems or government agencies to exert its conventions or its force. The semblance of politically correct claims for those without discernment may sound and look very much like those of faith and law systems, but these are far from being the same. Really, the fact that disciples succumb to culture is nothing more than peer pressure, called bullying in some contexts, and the human need to belong (and the fear of standing alone) by which culture gains and holds sway over society, one individual on one individual, at a time.

a semblance of law and faith

What does the use of these two seemingly different and disparate terms reveal about the embrace or rejection of homosexuality by the saints in Christ?

Simply, that it is what a person loves more and what a person hates less. It is that a person will choose what he/she loves over what he/she does not love. It is that a person will choose what he/she hates less over what he/she hates more.

The biblical use of these words reflects the crucible to which the would-be disciple is called. He is to settle the question of following Jesus in his mind along with his/her decision and determination of heart, mind, soul and strength to commit their lives to Jesus as Lord and Savior. There is no semblance of delusions about the road ahead. There are no dilutions (that is, a watering down of bible-founded convictions) of a culturally strained faith of appeasement. There is no semblance of any rigors of law to force the disciple, only the focused, clear resolve to commit their lives in obedience to the one whose death and resurrection which once confounded them has now convicted them of its significance and meaning for their life.

There is no semblance of love, because it is love. There is no semblance of hate, because it is hate. Effectively, these words represent the proverbial glass half full, glass half empty, that is, seeing and stating the same thing from a different perspectives. When Jesus cast father and mother, wife and children, brothers and sisters in the context of hate it was because he was just as willing to reveal himself and place himself in the position of one who is hated - LESS or loved MORE than family.

Some saints might feign offense and shirk at the idea of hating Jesus, but this is quite familiar for the disciple who has understood the call of Jesus to be crucified with Christ and take up his cross and follow Jesus.

There is nothing about the crucifixion or being crucified that is endearing or which evokes warm cuddles. It is with this understanding that the disciple acknowledges frankly that he HATES Jesus even as that disciple is drawn to Him because the disciple HATES his own LIFE EVEN MORE. His/her determination to follow Jesus is an act of HATE, that is, a move away* from family in order to be a disciple of Jesus. There is no more joy for the disciple in being crucified with Christ than there was joy for Jesus in being crucified. However, the writer noted this about Jesus in Hebrews 12:2, who for the joy that was set before him endured the cross. Joy is what awaited Jesus. It is what awaits the disciple just the other side of crucifixion. Again, this is not some delusion about all things being rosy, but joy in the scriptures is forever associated with the extraordinary and it is so aptly captured in the speechless response of the disciples when they saw the resurrected Jesus:

While they still didn’t believe for joy, and wondered, he said to them, “Do you have anything here to eat? (Luke 24:41)

Understanding their state of shock Jesus drew the disciples to the simple, mundane act of having some breakfast on the shores of Galilee. How vastly different the need for rants and chants to shock the unwary into listening, today. These methods reveal that culture is the primary root of influence in that message for or against these charges and judgments on people about love and hate. The charges are not in accordance with law. They are not in accordance with faith. They are definitely not with love and hate as taught by Jesus. One ought not marvel at these methods, because a dead message without life requires the same treatment as a dead person: shock.

The purpose of judgment

Judgment, according to culture, is something to be discarded as primitive and, - hateful or hate-filled. And, in one of those like faith claims of culture it is pointed out Jesus said his disciples were not to judge. Quite true. However, the context (see Matthew 7:1ff) of those words reveals it was an admonition against making hasty or rash judgments.

One instance where Jesus did make a judgment, and which is often overlooked, was when he said to a woman caught in the act of adultery and who was brought to Jesus: Go your way. From now on sin no more. Likewise, the apostle Paul passed judgment on a fornicator (referred to by Paul as a, so-called brother) in the church at Corinth. Paul did so without having met the man, but having been fully apprised of the situation he not only judged the individual, but urged the saints in Christ in Corinth to do likewise.

The distinction of these two judgments which is also mostly overlooked is that they were with the utmost regard for and the intended restoration and salvation of the individuals. These judgments of sin were not unto condemnation nor were they license for a carnal, public spectacle. There was/is nothing spiteful or hateful in those judgments of and by faith against sin made either by Jesus, by Paul or the disciples as taught and and as was demonstrated by Jesus and Paul.

allegations and false fear

Homosexuals and advocates of homosexuality have learned and made use of the label of homophobic to apply it to anyone (I’m confident I was cast in that mold quite a while back at the start of this article) who speaks a word without a full embrace of homosexuality. Compounding that charge of fear is the charge of judgment; both of which are as inaccurate as they are unfortunately sometimes true. The fear and lack of confidence in the saints shows in their inability and unwillingness to make judgments, but the apostle John encourages the saints on the matter of judgment, fear and love with these words:

In this love has been made perfect among us, that we may have boldness in the day of judgment, because as he is, even so are we in this world.  There is no fear in love; but perfect love casts out fear, because fear has punishment. He who fears is not made perfect in love.  We love him, because he first loved us.  If a man says, “I love God,” and hates his brother, he is a liar; for he who doesn’t love his brother whom he has seen, how can he love God whom he has not seen?  This commandment we have from him, that he who loves God should also love his brother. I John 4:17-21

Literally, the label-term homophobic means to fear what is the same. (Interesting to note how some online sources which purport to define the word focus on phobic (fear) and say nothing about the homo (same) part of the word.) Suffice it to say that the use of labels in this manner plays well to foment and stir up the sensibilities (or, the carnal mind, as the apostle Paul described it) of the people, but nothing by way of understanding and enlightenment.

False allegations of fear and hate abound, but this is the influence and way of culture as much on some saints as those outside the body, that is, the church of Christ. The truth is there is nothing to fear or hate about homosexuals or homosexuality any more than any of the other sins enumerated by Paul in I Corinthians 6:9;10. Rather, the ancient admonishment heed is found in Genesis when God said to Cain: Sin is at the door, but you must master it.

a life _ not

If it is true life is stranger than fiction it may be equally true that banner slogans, one-liner retorts and phrases may reflect a good bit (or in any case, a semblance) of truth such as, - get a life. However, dismissing Jesus’ words regarding father and mother, wife and children, brothers and sisters because one has been orphaned and without siblings is shortsighted, if not evasive. It is a simple truth. The person has their own life, still.

The call from Jesus for those who would follow after him is to lose their life in order that they might find it and attain eternal life.

yes, even their own life—such a person cannot be my disciple, said Jesus.

Simply and truthfully and as cleared as Jesus stated it such a person who LOVES their life MORE than Jesus cannot be his disciple. It is that love for their own life which turns and draws them away* from Jesus. Those who HATE Jesus LESS than their meaningless life are those who turn and are drawn to Jesus because they hate their lives MORE than they HATE Jesus. There are no delusions about the horror and spectacle of the crucifixion of the Jesus or the crucifying of self to sin to live no more for self, but to live for Jesus.

A person who HATES Jesus MORE than his family and life it is that hate which turns and draws them away from Jesus. They have chosen to live that life without Jesus. They cannot be his disciple. Any softening and peddling of words and claims and charges of HATE and LOVE or even laying claim to a semblance of what Jesus spoke does not change those words spoken by Jesus.

conclusion

Jesus spoke the words love and hate to impress on people what it means and costs to follow him. These words were never taught or intended to cast animosity, hatred or disdain on anyone in the Lord or outside of the fellowship of the saints who are in Christ Jesus.

Although culture has its own semblance of love and hate these words were never taught by Jesus or the apostles without understanding, knowing and obeying the call of Jesus to follow after him. Government laws, whether they were created out of love, hate or some semblance of righteousness for a country can not and do not speak the righteousness of God as proclaimed and made known by the saints in Christ. The saints in Christ tend to be quick to think they stand and uphold righteousness when they rally behind government laws which ostracize and condemn rather than trust on the Spirit of God who indwells the saints to fill and guide them in all wisdom.

Embracing or rejecting love or hate as a display for all to see is a mere semblance of love and hate as spoken, taught and demonstrated by Jesus and the apostles.

Practice and live what you have understood and do so with conviction. Joy and confidence is found in the saints in Christ who love him more or hate him less than family, possession or, even _ their life. Life, abundant and eternal is in Jesus. peace to all.

Read More