Results 1 - 3 of 3
|
|
|||||
Results from: Answered Bible Questions, Answers, Unanswered Bible Questions, Notes Ordered by Verse | ||||||
Results | Verse | Author | ID# | |||
1 | You are saying that our command to...? | John 13:34 | EdB | 128243 | ||
Xerxes First what I said was love is an emotion, a motivator, an attitude. Love in itself does nothing. If a man says he loves a women and does nothing, nothing is exactly what he will have. I can love my neighbor to death but if he was in the water drowning and unless I was willing to risk all and reach out my hand to save him my love would be nothing. We see it all the time in marriages two people love each other, but they also happen to love themselves more and the marriage dissolves. I'm saying love is important, love is essential but unless we put action to that love it nothing more than a word. God has called us to holiness, obedience, service, faith and action. we can sit around all day and love but until we put legs to our love it serves no purpose. I never meant to equate his stance of Romans 13 to anything John Lennon said. If that is the understanding you got then I apologize for that misunderstanding. What I meant and believe I did say is this. To say all you need is love is totally absurd. You first need Jesus Christ. John Lennon in his song "All you need is Love" tried to sell the idea that love would cure the ills of the world. Nothing but the Blood of Jesus cures the ills of this world. For someone anyone to come to a forum and make a statement that love is all you need is patently wrong. It was never my intention to say or imply any concept set down by Paul under the inspiration of the Holy Spirit was Humanist. I said incorrectly applying that principal to negate any other requirement but love was humanist. I fail to understand why what I'm saying is such a mystery to you or anyone else. Love must be put into action before it serves it's purpose. Once again 1 John 3:18 says it best. If this hasn't cleared up my position on this then I suspect I will be unable to clear it up and therefore it is best I remain silent on this issue which I will do unless someone else tries to slander me. And this is not an implication in any way that Xerxes attempted to slander me. EdB |
||||||
2 | Is this an adequate interpretation of..? | John 13:34 | Stultis the Fool | 128309 | ||
EdB, thank you for the various replies. I believe you confuse love with lies when you qualify your position with statements such as: "First what I said was love is an emotion, a motivator, an attitude. Love in itself does nothing. If a man says he loves a women and does nothing, nothing is exactly what he will have." "I can love my neighbor to death but if he was in the water drowning and unless I was willing to risk all and reach out my hand to save him my love would be nothing." "We see it all the time in marriages two people love each other, but they also happen to love themselves more and the marriage dissolves." If I am claiming to love, and I behave in these methods you have described, I do not love at all, and I am a liar. Is this an adequate interpretation of what you wish to express? If I behave as prescribed in 1 John 3:18 "My little children, let us not love in word, neither in tongue; but in deed and in truth," will I avoid the wickedness you described earlier? Consider the words in John 2:21 "But he that doeth truth cometh to the light, that his deeds may be made manifest, that they are wrought in God." EdB, if this is not the case, please tell me what wickedness will be wrought by someone who loves "in deed and in truth." I look forward to your reply. |
||||||
3 | Is this an adequate interpretation of..? | John 13:34 | Searcher56 | 128459 | ||
How many times do people need to explain it? | ||||||