What is the opposite of sin?

To answer my own question, somebody said in our Sabbath School class is that the opposite of sin is grace.

This would fit with the Memory Text which says:

I found the Sabbath Afternoon section interesting when I read the grace is unique to Christianity in that no other religion has grace in their religions.

that is interesting!

Yes, grace is unique because agape is selfless self initiation toward others. Thus the opposite of sin is agape, a characteristic of what is grace.

Only the living God reaches out to fallen man, while other "religions" have the opposite, or no separate deity at all.

Not to go into any detail on big words, but the uniqueness of grace is hidden in the Biblical propitiation, compared to heathen expiation: basically, propitiation means God comes to us and atones for us by the sacrifice of his only begotten Son for our sins; expiation, as the alternative (there's differing views on which word has which meaning, but the words differ as I'm submitting here), is man attempting to atone for himself with his deity by offering sacrifices of appeasement for his sins.

Grace propitiates, no other religion does.

And that is also very interesting!

Grace may be a healing balm for sin, but it is not the opposite of it. The opposite of transgression of the law is obedience to the law.

Blessings,

Green Cochoa.

Now you're moving on to practicalities, Green!

There are two sides to sin: the 'traditional' transgression of the law, and the principle of lawlessness. There are two sides to its opposite: agape, expressed in the law of the character of Christ our Lord and Saviour, and obedience to God whose law draws us to the Saviour from its curse.

Principle, thought, action...: all are true, and each has its place.

I think agape would be the opposite of sin.

Ditto. Same for Colin's.

Sin is the opposite of love. Disobedience and obedience are merely the outward manifestations of what's going on inside.

The opposite of sin is righteousness.

It is by GRACE that we leave sin behind and find righteousness.



Romans 6:18 Being then made free from sin, ye became the servants of righteousness.



Romans 5:21 That as sin reigned unto death, even so might grace reign through righteousness unto eternal life by Jesus Christ our Lord.

Romans 8:10 And if Christ be in you, the body is dead because of sin; but the Spirit is life because of righteousness.

1 Cor. 15:34 Awake to righteousness, and sin not;

2 Cor. 5:21 For he hath made him to be sin for us, who knew no sin; that we might be made the righteousness of God in him.



Prov. 14:34 Righteousness exalteth a nation: but sin is a reproach to any people.

Love can never stand alone --
It must be guided by RIGHTEOUSNESS.

In our lesson last week a member pointed out a thought provoking point about love.
Man's first sin was committed on the rational of love.
Adam sinned out of love. He knew it was wrong to take that fruit, he knew it was going against God's express command, but he loved Eve so much he couldn't bear the thought of being separated from her -- so he ate.

Love can be deceptive -- why?
Jer. 17:9 The heart is deceitful....
It MUST be based upon righteousness.

Adam's love was a lack of trust and reliance upon God.

not to take away from the legitimate points you are making:

Rom 13:10 Love worketh no ill to his neighbour: therefore love is the fulfilling of the law.

Mat 5:17 Think not that I am come to destroy the law, or the prophets: I am not come to destroy, but to fulfil.
1Jn 4:8 He that loveth not knoweth not God; for God is love.

1Jn 4:16 And we have known and believed the love that God hath to us. God is love; and he that dwelleth in love dwelleth in God, and God in him.

from my study the bible-and sop- is quite clear on what this love looks like.

i dont think this is accurate if you think about it. adam wasnt wrong in loving eve and not wanting to lose her, he was wrong in not trusting God to work out the situation, otherwise the statement makes adam look wrong for loving.

but, yes, we need to study the bible, old and new, to understand, or get a glimpse of what Gods love is like and practice that with our fellowman.

these also are important. then we have 1 corinthians 13.....and so many more. righteousness is Godlike love towards God and our fellowman.

Mat 22:36 Master, which is the great commandment in the law?
Mat 22:37 Jesus said unto him, Thou shalt love the Lord thy God with all thy heart, and with all thy soul, and with all thy mind.
Mat 22:38 This is the first and great commandment.
Mat 22:39 And the second is like unto it, Thou shalt love thy neighbour as thyself.
Mat 22:40 On these two commandments hang all the law and the prophets.

Joh 13:34 A new commandment I give unto you, That ye love one another; as I have loved you, that ye also love one another.
Joh 13:35 By this shall all men know that ye are my disciples, if ye have love one to another.


not meaning to get into overkill.

So what takes precedence, that is the question --
LOVE or God's Commands?

If we place love first -- we place our own emotional feelings above God's law.

If we place God's commands first we will love, for His law is based on love, but it is NOT based on our own feelings.

Adam let his love for Eve come first.
Thus yes, at that point it was wrong.
And by doing this he plunged the whole world into darkness.



The general feedback on the verse
"Love is the fulfilling of the law"
seems to be that if we only follow love, we automatically fulfil the law thus we don't have to worry about the law itself.

But what the text is really saying --
is
that love is the fulfilling of the law, that is love is doing or obeying God's law.

So I'll stick to the Biblical answer --

The opposite of SIN is RIGHTEOUSNESS.

Righteousness includes love (and patience, gentleness, godliness, faith, obedience to God's commands and every other godly attribute)

Dedication,

The error you do that leads to your contrasting love and the law is that you confuse love with sentimentalism. Read the sermon on the mount and you will see that what the bible calls love is far different. It must be extended to your enemies and those who persecute you. It is something you should be able to give the man who sets fire to the pile of wood you are being burned upon. It is something Jesus gave to the men who had whipped his back into shreads and then nailed him to a cross. There is no feeling that would allow for that. The divine law that makes perfection shares the food you have equally between family and the stranger who is in need. It picks up the man beaten half to death and carries him to safety, who if he had been healthy would cross the street to avoid meeting you on the same pavement, or if that could not be avoided would spit you in the face.

Righteousness, as Jesus disciples are likely to have understood the word, means being acquitted before God.

i agree, thomas.

righteousness =right doing
right doing=obeying the law
the law =a transcript of Gods character
Gods character =love
love=righteousness = obeying the law as summarized in deuteronomy and again by Jesus

adam did not love God supremely, that was His, and our, mistake.
when we study God, His humility and love towards us, then we can also learn to love rightly.

some people may claim all we have to do is love without understanding that means self-sacrificing.

It would take a very humble man to selflessly offer help to someone who openly dispises him.

When love takes precedence over God's commands, then it is based on nothing more than sentimentalism.

You point to the sermon on the mount --
here you admit that love MUST be based on God's Word, not upon the mere concept of "love".

Human beings have no true understanding of "love" unless it is subjected to God's commands.

Only then, by following God's commands can there be true love.


God is love; and infinite love will devise infinite laws based upon love. But when we push aside those laws, and try to define love by our own finite standards, we will miss the mark, just as Adam followed his own concept of love and plunged the world into darkness.

The human mind can easily turn Adam's choice into an ultruistic act of selfless love, giving up his own position of being right with God, to be with his wife.
But it was SIN. WRONG and caused death to become the lot of all his descendants.

Basically what I see in the replies, since you come right out and say "i'm mistaken" is that you believe love takes precedence over and above the commands of God.

No-- love can never take precedence over and above the commands of God. We will never understand love unless we subject it to God's Word.

Righteousness is far greater than simply an outward compliance to God's commandments.
Righteousness is state of being. It includes agape love, obedience to God's righteous law, gentleness, goodness, caring about the needs of others, and all the other atributes of godliness.

Righteousness is the opposite of sin.

Love can be righteous and it can be sinful.

Righteousness as it is presented in the Bible is not really the same as world commonly understands the term. The failure to comprehend its meaning is perhaps the most responsible regarding some people's concept that "righteousness" is legalistic. This misunderstanding destroys one of the most important concepts of the Bible.

The Hebrew word for righteousness is tseh'-dek [Strong:6663]upright, just, straight, innocent, true, sincere.

It is best understood as the product of a relationship with God and reveals itself in our relationship with others and how we relate to life in general. Thus a righteous person is morally true and pure, dependant totally upon God not only for his righteousness, but also for guidance for direction in life, walking with God in humble obedience and faith, (Thy will be done not mine own will) and this is revealed in thoughts and actions, which of course includes agape love for others.

i agree very much!! a very humble and Christlike person. i know its a struggle for me. cant wait till i feel for others as Christ has felt for us.

i think what bothers me most about this statement and the conclusions it can come to is that if adam was wrong for loving eve and not wanting to be separated from her then that makes God also very wrong for loving us and not wanting to be separated from us.

i think where we all agree is that adam should have trusted God, that is where he failed. but he didnt fail because he loved eve and didnt want to be separated from her. that kind of reasoning would make God a "sinner" as i see it.

there is only one kind of love. anything else is a counterfeit, or selfishness, as arnold puts it. there is only the true and the counterfeit of the true.

i dont see anything like that in this post. i see him pointing out the difference between claiming to "love" and actually loving as God did/does and told us to.

"love your enemies" is just as much a command as "thou shalt not bear false witness against thy neighbor". they are both love. i see no difference between love as God would have us practice it and the law.

they both say, "stop hurting your fellowman and do good to him".

Me neither.



Or, to put it another way, "Be like God." I agree with characterizing things this way, which is a reason I have difficulty with the ideas some have in regards to what God has done in the past or will do in the future.

Acts, in describing Jesus, says He went around "doing good." That's what God is like. He just does good. The problems come when good is eschewed for evil.

The difficulty is this --

My question wasn't about "contrasting law and love"
That was a strawman erected by Vastergotland.

I have never contrasted love and law.

My question was what takes precedence- what comes FIRST, obedience to God's will or what appears to be the loving way.

Is love to be subjected to God's will and law, or does love supercede God's will and law.

By arguing against me you are both indicating that you have problems with my belief and statements that love must be in subjection to God's will and law in order to be righteous love, it's on this premise I've addressed the posts.

Love is NOT the opposite of sin.
Righteousness, which includes righteous love, is the opposite of sin.



That is part of the lesson.

Romans 5:21 That as sin hath reigned unto death, even so might grace reign through righteousness unto eternal life by Jesus Christ our Lord.

Grace takes us from sin to righteousness.

Romans 6:16 Know ye not, that to whom ye yield yourselves servants to obey, his servants ye are to whom ye obey; whether of sin unto death, or of obedience unto righteousness?

Romans 6:18 Being then made free from sin, ye became the servants of righteousness.

Romans 8:10 And if Christ be in you, the body is dead because of sin; but the Spirit [is] life because of righteousness.

1 Cor. 15:34 Awake to righteousness, and sin not;

2 Cor. 5:21 For he hath made him (Jesus) to be sin for us, who knew no sin; that we might be made the righteousness of God in him.

The concept that love can operate on its own as the ultimate standard is the trump card of New Age beliefs!

That's why I can't understand why people are taking opposition to my statements that love must be in subjection to God's will and law in order for it to be righteous love. Love on it's own is NOT the ultimate standard.

To say love is the opposite of sin, is removing the standard that defines sin and placing that which IF UNDER THE DIRECTION of God's law is one of the highest attributes of righteousness, on it's own, as if it is the standard in its own right.

If you go back and read the whole concept it stated that AT the point where Adam let his love for Eve go against God's command, it became sin. His love at that point showed that he loved Eve more than he loved God.

The difference between Christ and Adam is huge.
There in the garden of Gethesemanie Christ prayer:
"If possible let this cup pass from Me, but NOT MY WILL BUT THINE BE DONE.

Do you see the difference?

Also there are other texts in the Bible like --
Luke 14:26 "If any come to me, and hate not his father, and mother, and wife, and children, and brethren, and sisters, yea, and his own life also, he cannot be my disciple."

That is a "hard saying" of Jesus. What does He mean here? Are we to hate our family members? Of course not -- at least not in the sense we understand the word "hate". What it means is that we are not to let our love for anyone come between us and our God. We are to obey God rather than people.


I suppose a story best illustrates --

A young man was convicted to follow Christ all the way in baptism. His mother wept and begged him not to become one of those cultic Sabbath Keepers, it would "kill" her, to think her son had taken up this belief system. If he were to be baptized it would ruin there relationship with each other, she said.

The young man didn't know what to do. He loved his mother very much and didn't want to hurt her. The situation dragged on for some time, the young man feeling the Holy Spirit draw him into making a commitment, yet his mother pleading with him to drop this religious stuff.

Then one night he read Luke 14:26.
It was clear to him what he must do.
Follow Christ! He must not allow his love for his mother to stop him from following Christ. He was baptised.

Cruel? Some thought so.
But by following Christ he found the road to salvation, and as the years passed, his mother too came to the truth.


Adam let his love for Eve come between him and God.
That's what was wrong with his love.

somehow we seem to be talking past each other.

Possibly we are talking past each other.

That's the problem when one starts with concepts addressed by former posters. Then someone else posts. Then another person writes something that misrepresents what I meant -- like

"The error you do that leads to your contrasting love and the law is that you confuse love with sentimentalism."
But then, of course, love that is not in subjection to God's law is sentimentalism no matter how noble it may appear to others.



I guess the way I see it at this point is --

There is still the ambiguty as to which comes first -- which has the highest priority, this does NOT mean the other is pushed aside.

1. The broad generalizations of what it means to love
"Love your neighbor and even your enemies, do good to them that hate you" etc.
Or
2. Our love for God and obedience to all His commandments.

Most of the time it may seem the two are one and the same. After all, Christ commanded us to love our enemies, do good to them that hate you etc. etc. So what's the problem?

But when I read what satan has planned for this world I'm convinced that it isn't always one and the same.

The "love principle" or "love ray" of the New Age movement demands that people give up their individualism, their so called "selfish" holding onto individual convictions and unite in love, for the common good of the whole community. This means giving up fundamentalistic beliefs. Those refusing to do so will be accused of NOT loving, and being the cause of this world's strife.

It will be made to appear that God's followers are selfishly clinging to divisive beliefs, thinking only of themselves, and if they only had the love of God in their hearts they would have the "common good" of the community at heart.

But now we are getting of this thread's subject which is the Sabbath School lesson on grace!

i guess im not seeing where anyone was "arguing against you" nor putting forth anything but the biblical love Jesus came to exemplify.

i get the impression most here participating know the difference between any "new age" and the biblical concept without having to spell it out each time.

God is love. So, yes, He is the ultimate standard.

Of course, there are things such as sentimentalism and lust that are called love, but are not love. But let's not let their misunderstanding define our beliefs.

God is love.

Hi Dedication, you brought some nice points and thanks for posting the New Age perspective of love to compare with God's way.

That's interesting, that they only can achieve "love" by losing their identity and fundamental belief for the sake of the community. We Christian, need to almost do the same thing. In regard to fundamental belief, we need to seek for God's beliefs and lay aside our erronous belief. And for our selfish identity, we need to lay that aside and surrender to God's will and become a new person. However, God brings our true noble identity to the surface throught Christ. And His grace is supreme with His patience and the tender trials He gives us, to bring us to an ultimate trusting relationship with Him and not in ourself.

Concerning Love, the Bible says very clearly that God is Love. Love is not something we individual have. Love is a person and by having that person dwelling in us, that's the only way we can reflect God's loving character.

I hope you are right --
Though I have found a large number of Christians who don't see the difference, because the "new age" has invaded the churches and clothed itself in scripture and learned to speak with the same religious phrases Christians are accustomed to hear. It isn't all that obvious on the surface. The main identifying mark is this -- both the true and the false place love on a high plane of personal attributes to exhibit, but one places love above God's law, the other bases love upon God's law.

i hadnt thought of it in that light before, elle, but you are right. i like how you contrasted the true with the counterfeit. we are to "lose" ourselves for the good of others (the community), the difference will be would we be willing to kill those who disagree with us, or view things differently. or are we willing to be killed because we love God, His truth and others. that would seem to be the ultimate test of whether we do have Godly love or the counterfeit.

Are you sure that is the ultimate test?

I have a feeling a lot of people will be lost who would never dream of killing anyone, even if they disagree vigoriously with them. It's not their hate of others, but the fact they don't love the truth that they will be swept away by the deception. (See 2 thess. 2)
Now though I questioned the first half, the other half of your statement I can agree with -- God's faithful people would rather die then dishonor the God Who loves them and whom they love, they'd rather die than give up His truth, and His mission of reaching out in love to others.

i can understand your concern.

that seems to be where hanging out with people and getting to know them and where theyre coming from helps. i dont know where any two of us completely agree on everything. i also wouldnt doubt that each of us thinks others are in "heresy" on some point. that may not have been the best way to say the last sentence.

i was thinking of the sunday law, tho many times i have to wonder how far someone would go, even now.

a person had to be banned just recently from another forum because he made it clear he believed he didnt have to treat anyone he considered in "heresy" with any kind of respect. you have to wonder where someone like that would stop. and yet im sure he believes he "loves".

others break the commandments regularly to defend their particular beliefs. (we both have experienced the "wrath" of rb, for instance-and he believes hes acting in "love")

Yes, God is the personification of LOVE, He isn't just love however, He is an INDIVIDUAL,a SUPREME BEING, not just a concept.

God is many things --

" God is a consuming fire," Duet. 4:24, Heb. 12:29
"God is a merciful God" Duet. 4:31
"God is a jealous God" Duet 6:15
"God is gracious and merciful, 2 Chr. 30:9
" God is terrible majesty. Job 30:32
" God is my salvation.Ps. 62:7
"God is the strength of my heart, Ps. 73:26
"God is the judge: Ps. 75:7
"Our God is holy. Ps. 99:9
"The LORD [is] righteous in all his ways, and holy in all his works. Ps. 145:17
"God is righteous Dan. 9:14
" God is light, and in him is no darkness at all. 1 John 1:5
"God is greater than our heart, and knoweth all things. 1 John 3:20


"God is true. John 3:33
" God is faithful, 1 Cor. 1:9


These are just a few of the many attributes of God.
And yes, God is love--

But that doesn't make "love" the supreme standard.
God is the supreme standard of what love (and all the other righteous attributes) are.

Yes, He demonstrated what real love is all about.
The love demonstrated at Calvary is a love beyond the greatest capacity of human thought. God's love is wider, higher, deeper broader than anything we can fathom.
He will also demonstrate what real justice is all about as well.


Eph. 3:17 That Christ may dwell in your hearts by faith; that ye, being rooted and grounded in love,
3:18 May be able to comprehend with all saints what [is] the breadth, and length, and depth, and height;
3:19 And to know the love of Christ, which passeth knowledge, that ye might be filled with all the fulness of God.
3:20 Now unto him that is able to do exceeding abundantly above all that we ask or think, according to the power that worketh in us,
4:22 That ye put off concerning the former conversation the old man, which is corrupt according to the deceitful lusts;
4:23 And be renewed in the spirit of your mind;
4:24 And that ye put on the new man, which after God is created in righteousness and true holiness.
4:25 Wherefore putting away lying, speak every man truth with his neighbour: for we are members one of another.
4:26 Be ye angry, and sin not: let not the sun go down upon your wrath:
4:27 Neither give place to the devil.
4:28 Let him that stole steal no more: but rather let him labour, working with [his] hands the thing which is good, that he may have to give to him that needeth.
4:29 Let no corrupt communication proceed out of your mouth, but that which is good to the use of edifying, that it may minister grace unto the hearers.

Romans 1:17 For therein is the righteousness of God revealed from faith to faith: as it is written, The just shall live by faith.
1:18 For the wrath of God is revealed from heaven against all ungodliness and unrighteousness of men, who hold the truth in unrighteousness;

Ps. 98:9 he cometh to judge the earth: with righteousness shall he judge the world, and the people with equity.
Rev. 15 Even so, Lord God Almighty, true and righteous are thy judgments.

Very true -- the Bible does say that people will kill thinking they are doing God's will.

I guess I was thinking more of the cultural "please everyone" be nice, don't step on any toes, but not really living with Christ type of person, who will be swept away in the final deceptions.

Paul speaks of the christian living led by the Spirit, with listing the fruits of the Spirit. These can be summed up in the great commandment, Love God and love everyone else, and those who live this way break not Gods laws.

More specifically, you wrote: "So what takes precedence, that is the question --
LOVE or God's Commands?

If we place love first -- we place our own emotional feelings above God's law.

If we place God's commands first we will love, for His law is based on love, but it is NOT based on our own feelings."

If you consider that God's commands are summed up in the great command on Love of God and all other men, asking on precedence is itself a straw man.

I think it can be rather easily shown that love (agape) is the opposite of sin. Just from general principles, agape is self-sacrificing love. The essence of sin, otoh, is selfishness. So here we see the contrast. On the one hand, you have the giving of self for the good of others, while on the other you have taking from others for the good of self.

From Scripture, the writings of John, in particular, bring out this concept. For example, from 1 John 3:



This is just a small portion, but if one reads the whole chapter (or, better yet, the whole letter), it is clear that John contrasts love (agape) with sin the whole way through.



What does righteousness include besides righteous love? Isn't righteous love simply another way of saying agape? If righteousness consists of righteous love, and righteousness is the opposite of sin, then righteous love is the opposite of sin, which is simply another way of saying that agape is the opposite of sin.

Another way of seeing this is the case is simply from the fact that love is the fulfilling of the law. What's the opposite of fulfilling the law? It's sin.

This is an interesting thought. As I've thought about this, I doubt this is true. John contrasts the one who hates his brother with the one who walks in the light. Walking in the light is put together with loving one's brother, and having eternal life. (See 1 John 2). On the other hand, one who hates his brother does not have eternal life, and walks in darkness. So it seems that loving one's brother/hating one's brother is a valid dividing line between those who are lost and those who aren't.

Jesus made clear in the Sermon on the Mount the relationship between hating and murder. It seems to me that unless one is born again, it is inevitable that one will hate one's brother. This happens when one's brother crosses self. By nature, we can't stand anything that gets in the way of the desires of self, and so we hate anyone who does that. It takes the love of God in the heart, in short, being born again, to change this. We cannot love (agape) without being born again. If we don't love our brother, we will hate him, which is tantamount to murder.

using him as an example since we both know him, but at the same time not telling you anything you dont already know, he is the perfect example of "killing". we dont have to literally, physically kill someone to "kill" them. its interesting that there is the term, "assassinating ones character". coming up with any and every kind of accusation to beat down ones opponent, or "kill" their influence.

but he isnt the only one, maybe he and those like him are the most obvious, but we all do it. it is a real struggle to stay in prayer and try to make sure we are dealing with what is actually said/meant. to not try to cut the other person down when we seem to be losing the "war".

what i have seen on these forums just amazes me and by a people who would defend the "law" and the IJ to the death. but that by no means implies that i am faultless myself. many times i have had to apologize, had to go back and make amends myself.


yes, and if i may gently point out, if you go back and read the posts the love we were stressing was the "hard" one. the one that has to humble down and admit when it is wrong, that has to make amends, the one that has to constantly search its self in surrender to God to see how one is behaving, how they are treating their fellowman.

someone else could probably do a better job with what i am trying to say.

It looks like our paradigms are pretty different, as I'll try to show below.


I don't view "love" as just a concept. Your view of "love" seems to be the wishy-washy emotion that is often sung about on the radio. You reject that "love" and rightly so, but that is not the "love" we find in the Bible. 1Cor 13 gives us a peek at true love. 1Jn, especially chapter 4, spells is out pretty clearly.


Here's another difference. You see "love" as one of the many attributes of God. I see "love" as the defining characteristic of God, and those attributes you listed are the different facets and manifestations of love. Love is not just one of the list, it is the aggregate of the list.

John didn't say God HAS love; he said God IS love. That does not downgrade God; it uplifts love.

On these hang the law and the prophets. Against such there is no law.

Be careful. You might pop up in a vision or dream one of these days.

im addressed somewhere on his site with my "errors", does that count? i understand it bears little resemblance to what i actually said, tho. but then im in good company. once he gets done with the bible/sop they also bear little resemblance to what theyve said.

i only mentioned one tiny part of that love. as somone else mentioned, sharing ones meal with another when one barely has enough is another aspect of that love. i think it would take a lifetime, and library, to point how far-reaching and deep that love goes.

I see things this way as well.

As this week's study is on grace, how do love and grace relate to each other?

You reasoning is faulty -- at least that's what they taught us in school.

It goes like this --

All cats have four legs
That creature over there has four legs, therefore it must be a cat.
BUT no -- it's not.

What you are saying:
All God's commandments are summed up in love
That person is loving, therefore he is keeping God's commandments.
BUT no -- they may be, but yet they may not be.

Love must be governed by more than what one thinks is the "loving, selfless thing to do". God's commandments must take precedence.

You've jumped too far in the educational system. The logic is based on propositional logic, not the syllogisms of deductive logic. Here's how it goes:

Love is the fulfillment of the law.
Therefore, if a person is loving, he fulfills the law.

The key to the logic is the simple proposition that love fulfills the law.

What you seem to be proposing is that love does not always fulfill the law. Is that right?


I think the problem is not one of governance, but definition. Love is NOT "what one thinks is the 'loving, selfless thing to do'." If that's what you think love is, then you certainly should reject it as the guiding principle of godliness because it has human ideas as its foundation.

But once we escape the tangles of human ideas, we will find that love, as God defines it, is not something that is subject to the law, but is something that determines what the law must be. Check this out:
I was going to cut that shorter, but it was too good to abridge.

So there we have Paul's one-liner, and the SOP expounding on it. Underneath God's law, acting as its foundation and guide, is divine love. In short, love is what GOD thinks is the "loving, selfless thing to do" and His law is simply an enumeration of how to go about doing that. And if one is loving, as God defines loving, how could he sin? (Now would be a good time to segue into 1 John 3.)

Check out the SC 60.2 quote above. Grace is what enables us to love. Without it, all we can do is to be selfish.

So you reason --

Since sin is the opposite of righteousness
And selfless love is one of the highest attributes of righteousness,
Therefore selfless love is the opposite of sin.

Which is true if you are working from the general principle to the specifics, but faulty reasoning if you then throw out the premise and replace it with a specific.

Righeousness is still the starting premise.

Faith and trust in God are also the opposite of sin.
Romans 14:23 whatsoever is not of faith is sin.
So is temperance the opposite of sin.
1 John 3:3 And every man that hath this hope in him purifieth himself, even as he is pure.
Purity is the opposite of sin.
So are all the attributes of righteousness, the opposite of sin.
Gal. 5:22 But the fruit of the Spirit is love, joy, peace, longsuffering, gentleness, goodness, faith,
5:23 Meekness, temperance: against such there is no law.

Thus righteousness is still the opposite of sin.
Love must be part of that righteousness, to be included as the opposite of sin.


So was Adam's self sacrificing love for Eve sin or righteous, when he chose to die with her rather than to obey God?
Adam, through his love for Eve, disobeyed the command of God, and fell with her.





"This is the love of God, that we keep His commandments."1 John 5:3 "He that turneth away his ear from hearing the law, even his prayer shall be abomination." Proverbs 28:9.

Love is fulfilling God's law. It doesn't take the place of God's law.

Yes, love for God and others in perfect accord with God's will is the goal.
Yet, God's Word, must always take precedence, it must be placed higher than our best concepts of love, or we will never be in accord with God, but making "love" our god.


God is a God of truth. Justice and mercy are the attributes of His throne. Holiness and purity radiate from His person. Power and majesty are His. Yet, He is a God of love, of pity and tender compassion. Thus He is represented in His Son, our Saviour. He is a God of patience and long-suffering, not wanting people to perish but to come to repentance and turn from their evil ways to His saving grace. If such is the being whom we adore and to whose character we are seeking to assimilate, we are worshiping the true God.

Yes, we need to dwell upon the matchless love of God revealed through Christ our Savior, yet if we concentrate solely on one attribute to the neglect of the others, we may end up with a different god.

It appears you are coming at this from an idealistic viewpoint, not from real world.
We are humans not robots.
We make choices as to what to do and not to do.
That's how God made us -- to be thinking people.

You seem to be saying we are infused with "divine love" and automatically fulfil the law, and any "loving act" is therefore fulfilling God's law.

BUT THE REALITY of life is --
What we choose to do IS HUMAN choice, we are NOT divine.
People will THINK and feel they are doing the loving thing, when in actuality their "loving act" could be against God's commandments.
They think that since they are now Christians and have accepted Christ -- their "loving" impulses are now automatically fulfilling God's law.

Yes,
Love is the fulfilment of the law --
We can't separate love from obedience, or it isn't obedience at all. However, LOVE WILL SEEK TO FULFIL THE LAW.

The quote you gave CLEARLY SAYS LOVE LOOKS TO THE LAW for its direction. It seeks and wants to obey God's law. It makes God and His Word the precedent, not the "love".




Of course love is the human response.
You aren't saying that we have become gods and now love like God? We will never love like God. We can only love as human beings. And that love MUST BE SUBJECTED TO GOD'S WORD! We must seek out God's will, and conform ourselves to His will, that is love, not the other way around.

That love response in us grows as we contemplate the cross, and what Christ has done for us. And then, yes, we want to do what God says. We love to do what He says, because we love HIM. We love others because we see His love for them. But it will always be our love from our human hearts and minds. Influenced and renewed by the Holy Spirit, yes, but still our human love.

And IT MUST BE IN SUBJECTION TO GOD'S WORD AND COMMANDS.



What can I say, without appearing as "unloving". But how in the world does one "escape human ideas" without going to God's word and law?

What you wrote there is the very essense of "new theology" -- to think our love is no longer our human love but divine love within, and so we can determine what the law must be?

Brother --
We are human beings,
don't get into the mystic idea that we will ever have so much "divine love" that we can determine what the law is to be.
We are subject to God's law.

When EGW says divine love is implanted in our soul,she's refering to the change in our motives, she does NOT mean we become divine and can now determine what God's law should be.


The quote you gave, does not match the statement --
It clearly states that God's law becomes imprinted in our hearts and minds, and our love response to God is to fulfil His law. We NEVER DEFINE the law.

Was Jesus as you describe - bound by the shackles of human love?

Jesus asked Peter, "Do you agape Me?" Peter could only respond, "I phileo You."

Who is our example, Jesus or Peter?

The "love" you speak of is generated by human effort, trying hard to keep the law of God as a set of rules. The "love" I speak of seeks to bless others, for the benefit of others, and thereby fulfills the law as a result.

You see keeping the law as resulting in love; I see love as resulting in keeping the law. It's a question of which is the cause and which is the effect. "If you keep My commandments, you will love Me."

Have you ever seen the EGW quote that says that in obeying God's commands, Christians are merely following their own impulses? That's conversion. He has been changed from the inside, making the outside Christlike also. Something like the cup.

In contrast, the one who looks at the law as a set of requirements is trying to clean the outside of the cup. Life is one big chore for such a one.

Plus, it's time to use your syllogisms now. You have erred in concluding that I said anything like "we can determine what the law is to be."

6 I marvel that you are turning away so soon from Him who called you in the grace of Christ, to a different gospel, 7 which is not another; but there are some who trouble you and want to pervert the gospel of Christ. 8 But even if we, or an angel from heaven, preach any other gospel to you than what we have preached to you, let him be accursed.

15 We who are Jews by nature, and not sinners of the Gentiles, 16 knowing that a man is not justified by the works of the law but by faith in Jesus Christ, even we have believed in Christ Jesus, that we might be justified by faith in Christ and not by the works of the law; for by the works of the law no flesh shall be justified.
17 “But if, while we seek to be justified by Christ, we ourselves also are found sinners, is Christ therefore a minister of sin? Certainly not! 18 For if I build again those things which I destroyed, I make myself a transgressor. 19 For I through the law died to the law that I might live to God. 20 I have been crucified with Christ; it is no longer I who live, but Christ lives in me; and the life which I now live in the flesh I live by faith in the Son of God, who loved me and gave Himself for me. 21 I do not set aside the grace of God; for if righteousness comes through the law, then Christ died in vain.”
1 O foolish Galatians! Who has bewitched you that you should not obey the truth, before whose eyes Jesus Christ was clearly portrayed among you as crucified? 2 This only I want to learn from you: Did you receive the Spirit by the works of the law, or by the hearing of faith? 3 Are you so foolish? Having begun in the Spirit, are you now being made perfect by the flesh?
5 Therefore He who supplies the Spirit to you and works miracles among you, does He do it by the works of the law, or by the hearing of faith?—
9 So then those who are of faith are blessed with believing Abraham. 10 For as many as are of the works of the law are under the curse; for it is written, “Cursed is everyone who does not continue in all things which are written in the book of the law, to do them.” 11 But that no one is justified by the law in the sight of God is evident, for “the just shall live by faith.”
19 What purpose then does the law serve? It was added because of transgressions, till the Seed should come to whom the promise was made; and it was appointed through angels by the hand of a mediator. 20 Now a mediator does not mediate for one only, but God is one. 21 Is the law then against the promises of God? Certainly not! For if there had been a law given which could have given life, truly righteousness would have been by the law. 22 But the Scripture has confined all under sin, that the promise by faith in Jesus Christ might be given to those who believe. 23 But before faith came, we were kept under guard by the law, kept for the faith which would afterward be revealed. 24 Therefore the law was our tutor to bring us to Christ, that we might be justified by faith. 25 But after faith has come, we are no longer under a tutor.
8 But then, indeed, when you did not know God, you served those which by nature are not gods. 9 But now after you have known God, or rather are known by God, how is it that you turn again to the weak and beggarly elements, to which you desire again to be in bondage? 10 You observe days and months and seasons and years. 11 I am afraid for you, lest I have labored for you in vain.
21 Tell me, you who desire to be under the law, do you not hear the law? 22 For it is written that Abraham had two sons: the one by a bondwoman, the other by a freewoman. 23 But he who was of the bondwoman was born according to the flesh, and he of the freewoman through promise, 24 which things are symbolic. For these are the two covenants: the one from Mount Sinai which gives birth to bondage, which is Hagar— 25 for this Hagar is Mount Sinai in Arabia, and corresponds to Jerusalem which now is, and is in bondage with her children— 26 but the Jerusalem above is free, which is the mother of us all.
4 You have become estranged from Christ, you who attempt to be justified by law; you have fallen from grace. 5 For we through the Spirit eagerly wait for the hope of righteousness by faith. 6 For in Christ Jesus neither circumcision nor uncircumcision avails anything, but faith working through love. 13 For you, brethren, have been called to liberty; only do not use liberty as an opportunity for the flesh, but through love serve one another. 14 For all the law is fulfilled in one word, even in this: “You shall love your neighbor as yourself.”
16 I say then: Walk in the Spirit, and you shall not fulfill the lust of the flesh. 17 For the flesh lusts against the Spirit, and the Spirit against the flesh; and these are contrary to one another, so that you do not do the things that you wish. 18 But if you are led by the Spirit, you are not under the law.
2 Bear one another’s burdens, and so fulfill the law of Christ. 3 For if anyone thinks himself to be something, when he is nothing, he deceives himself.


This is the source of my reasoning.

Of course now you throw the common rag that every person who tries to get away from God's law does -- saying I'm just "cleaning the outside" and don't believe in inner renewal, and the Holy Spirit imprinting His law in mind and heart, because I don't trust my own feelings and determine to base what is right or wrong upon God's Word. Because I believe God's commands take precedence over even the best understanding we have of love.

That somehow I'm trying to "generate love" by obeying a set of rules.
I guess you didn't read my posts --

I wrote:
"That love response in us grows as we contemplate the cross, and what Christ has done for us. And then, yes, we want to do what God says. We love to do what He says, because we love HIM. We love others because we see His love for them. But it will always be our love from our human hearts and minds. Influenced and renewed (and I must add, purified) by the Holy Spirit, yes, but still our human love."




Here you clearly say that love as God defines it is not subject to God's law, but determines what the law must be.

Doesn't quite make sense does it --
Since God's law and God's love are never in conflict.


Yet, with that logic, people say, "now that I know something about God's love, I'll let that determine what God's law must be.
That, whether you agree or not, is the logical conclusion of what you said.

A person will never escape HUMAN thought, for that is the center of their being -- a human being that thinks. You will never think exactly the same as anyone else.
Your definition of "how God defines love" will never be exactly the same in actual situations, as anothers.

And God's thoughts are far above our thoughts.

God's definition of love is FAR ABOVE our concept of that love.
Our BEST attempts fall short.

-- A person will never even know how God defines love unless they study His Word and His commands.
He will never know how God's commands define love unless they study His Word and His commands.

We can NEVER depend on self thinking we've arrived at some level of perfect love within that we no longer need to follow God's commandments.


So are you saying God's law is not binding? It's not required of a Christian to "keep God's commandments"?
Is it a burden to you?
Actually, I think the one who thinks it's a big chore to obey God's commandments is the one who is only cleaning the outside.
If you really had God's "love" there would be no resistance to His commandments.
It would be plain that God's law is like a hedge keeping us on the right path as we follow Jesus with gratitude and joy.

Use your syllogisms, friend. You are jumping to erroneous conclusions.

Did I say you were "just" cleaning the outside? Quote me.

What I was trying to get across was that you were cleaning the outside of the cup, and from there working toward cleaning the inside. "If you keep My commandments, you will love Me."

Though you believe in inner renewal, you are teaching that it comes from outward compliance. Your cart precedes the horse.

1) The law is binding, not because it is written on stone, but because it is written on the heart. That's the only way for the law to be truly binding.

2) Keeping the commandments is required, like breathing is required.

3) Why would it be a burden, if it is simply carrying out my impulses? Now, if I was trying to keep the law, but my heart really wanted to do something else, that would be a burden. The only way for the law to be not a burden is for my heart and mind to be renewed. Anything short is "grit your teeth and bear it" legalism.

because God is love He is able to extend grace to us, who have failed in loving Him supremely and others as ourself. if He were not love He would have just wiped us out and went on His merry way without a second thought.

the messenger of the Lord seems to have thought differently:







there is only one way into heaven, studying Christ, His love for us, how He treated all.

Way to go Arnold! Ask for quotes!

I truly regret missing this week's posts as they happened; may have helped sooner. Shall touch here on salient bits from the whole week's discussion.

I'll come to grace in a moment...; it deserves a strong mention! lol

Love and law. The law of God expresses his love so we can understand how far from it we sinful humans are: they are synonymous, God's agape and the Commandments both as written and as demonstrated in the life and death of Christ. Human love, whether family, friendly or romantic, isn't the same as Christian love, our experience of God's agape, since they're varieties of human expression, but..., when backed by Christian love any human expression of love virtually becomes Christian love itself...

Righteous: what's it mean in and for us? Acquittal can't be the main point as then it'd be a misnomer, for much, much more than pardon is involved! Righteous means, as pointed out earlier, right doing: therefore, Rom 5:19 is not the same as Rom 5:18. Being made righteous is what justification by faith is, with the renewal of the mind of Rom 12:2. Acquittal is the legal basis of this spiritual experience, but that acquittal isn't an experience, it's a legal event, and that's a matter of grace alone, is it not, for Jesus is "the Saviour of the world".

Moreover, righteous also means both just & straight(ened): that means correction of the bent (the meaning of "iniquity", isn't it?) of sinfulness in human nature to the justified, righteous, straightened mind of Christ, which he was born with (whatever you wish to call his mind other than justified...! Justified without needing conversion, perhaps?) and we receive at conversion.

Righteous love is Christian love, and that starts as the attitude we have when we use the "mind of Christ": righteousness is attitude first, then thought, word and deed, and that attitude is the mindset submitted to Christ's Lordship by his Spirit dwelling in our mind - hence we have "the mind of Christ", just as he learned obedience by the things he suffered. The things he suffered is best interpreted as deprivation of sinful satisfaction, which his adopted, sinful flesh craved, but he learned obedience as he followed his Father by grace through faith.

Determining the law of God and its viability/meaning in human life by human measures is indeed "the new theology", since it quite likely interprets Christ's suffering in learning by obedience as something other than the suffering of his sinful, human flesh which he felt: he didn't conquer sin in the flesh to be our Saviour (...says the new theology; also, he's our Example after qualifying as Saviour as in the paragraph above!), so we can't either - whatever sort of logic you want to call that, that's the end result of the "new theology".

Agape is who God is, but what God is, the essence of the Godhead or divine nature, is holiness. Holiness calls for justice and mercy, that is wrath against sin and redemption from sin (& the wrath due it), and agape supplies both.

The fruits of the Spirit conclude with what??? "Against such there is no law." Holiness of God and righteousness of Christ, imputed as our renewed minds and imparted in to our changing and ultimately changed characters - reflecting Christ, are in harmony with the written expression of God's love. The law was given to expose what was contrary to God's will, thus it expressed God's agape, rather than any expression of human wisdom or claims of love. Once we come to Christ, having been driven by the law to seek his salvation from our sins and sinfulness, the law lain in the ark in heaven remains merely a memorial of God's grace in Christ moving out of glory to save this lost world: the written law shall have no more relevance since it is written on our hearts by and in the person of the Holy Spirit (who shall never depart from us, for all eternity; he is our participation in the divine nature...). The Holy Spirit is Christ and the Father's joint, personal omnipresence (thus, not the same type of person as them): he materialises Christ's characteristic righteousness in our minds and lives. Love is equal to the law, and the law is equal to love, but the written law has played its part as Christ's love, agape, remains in our hearts, forever more from this life of faith, for Jesus then to return and fetch us home to be with him where he is.

Now for a bit on grace....

Grace and love...: yes, by grace love is expressed to us in Christ. They speak for each other, though, don't they? They're synonymous, aren't they: love is graceous and grace is loving..., speaking of agape here, of course.

Grace itself is misstated, imho, as that which we don't deserve: undeserved favour. Is that all??! Isn't grace another book bigger than "favour" of whichever sort it is here rightly said to be?!! It was Ps Ian Hartley, originally of South Africa, but possibly now still in Canada somewhere, who related to us young adults at the camp meeting sessions reserved for us who were older than senior youth - 26-35, that grace is God's actions, his plans, his creation, and then also his intervention in our creation after we turned from him.

God's grace is his lifestyle. Think a little wider than "words": what does God do with himself, has he also done and shall always do, after sin in over and gone??? He provides all that his creation could ever want or think to need and want, and that includes basing our justification, sanctification and glorification in Jesus' graceous, incarnated life, which we receive by accepting his spiritual history as ours, believing he graceously made his move so we find out afterwards that it's all sorted out for us, should we wish his option.

Grace doesn't just encompass salvation mercy, etc. It is God's whole story of catering to fallen and unfallen creatures, and more than that, since we don't know the end of his plans, into eternity to come, beyond relocating to the new earth....

that is an interesting thought. no one "deserves" life. or anything else the Lord has provided for the fallen and unfallen.

Good thing my quotes are confined to a limited area.

Yes, much bigger. I have heard it defined as God's attitude toward us.

I would have to agree with the messenger this time.

Dwelling on God's matchless love cannot neglect His other attributes, because it is composed of all His attributes. It's like saying that if we are too focused on eating a BLT sandwich, we might neglect eating the bacon (fake SDA bacon, of course), lettuce, and tomato! Take all of God's attributes, roll them up together, and you'll get love.

No, I've never said, "if you keep my commandments, you will love Me."
First we come to Christ as we are. We accept Him as our Lord and Savior. We are baptised into His death, thus signifying that our old life is dead, and rise with Him into newness of life.
Love fulfils God's law. Love never throws out God's commands as a burden or yoke.

The Bible also says:
1 John 3:3 And every man that hath this hope in him purifieth himself, even as he is pure.

Yes, there are things we must CLEAN out of our lives. The Holy Spirit will help you do that.








Obviously you guys all totally and completely miss the point.

Where in the world did I say all the things you are now putting in my mouth.

No --

My premise is this --
We must place the Word of God and His law as the standard or we will NEVER know what love, righteousness, etc. is all about.

If God's Word and His law isn't placed first, we are left with nothing more than "what we think is the loving thing to do."

Just like Adam --
Didn't he do the "loving thing" by eating the fruit?


God has not left us with just our feelings of "what the loving thing to do is" He gave us a map, His Word and His commandments.

That has nothing to do with gaining God's favor by our works etc. etc. etc. You are launching off into a totally different subject.

But when "love" is placed above God's commandments as having the power to determine what those commands should be -- a person is headed for big trouble.

When people THINK that all their "impulses" and "desires" are in perfect accord with God's commands and thus they don't need God's Word or commands anymore they are deceiving themselves.

True, a person in close fellowship with Christ, will delight to do His will, that is the only way keep God's commands. But love is still a principle, and God's Word sets the standard for that principle, not our inner reasoning.

All I'm saying is that God's Word and His commands MUST BE THE PRINCIPLE governing what love, righteousness etc is.





For example --

In real life:
A person has accepted Christ, yes, His heart and mind have been moved by the Holy Spirit and He wants to follow Christ. Then he is convicted he should keep the Sabbath. But to keep the Sabbath means losing his job.

Now he listens to the modern "love fulfils the law" therefore being loving is all that is needed.
He starts to think, God wants me to love my family. I love them by providing for them. It would not be the loving thing to do something that would cause me to lose my job. We'd lose our house, and ..... I know God is love, and He wants me to love, so I'll keep the Sabbath in the hours I'm not working, and I'm sure God will understand, that I have to provide for my family. He knows my heart. He knows I love Him! He knows I love my family....


Or he listens to a person who tells him, that God's commands are the guide. He is encouraged to "trust and obey" for that is the true way of love and happiness. In spite of his families protests he stops work on the Sabbath, loses his job, and endures some pretty tough times for a couple months. Tough financially and tough because of the condemnation heaped upon him by people who think he's too fanatical. But finally God rewards his faith, he finds work and happiness in the Lord.

Seems the "messenger" is speaking of all His attributes, not just one....
1, "His love,
2. the beauty, the perfection, of His character.
3. Christ in His self-denial,
4. Christ in His humiliation,
5. Christ in His purity
6. and holiness,
7. Christ in His matchless love

GC 415 "The ark that enshrines the tables of the law is covered with the mercy-seat, before which Christ pleads his blood in the sinner's behalf. Thus is represented the union of justice and mercy in the plan of human redemption. This union infinite wisdom alone could devise, and infinite power accomplish; it is a union that fills all Heaven with wonder and adoration."

"Those who will empty their hearts of vanity and rubbish, through the grace of God may purify the chambers of the mind, and make it a storehouse of knowledge, purity, and truth. And it will be continually reaching beyond the narrow boundaries of worldly thought, into the vastness of the Infinite. The justice and mercy of God will be unfolded to the moral perceptions. The grievous character of sin, with its results, will be discerned. The character of God, His love manifested in giving His Son to die for the world, and the beauty of holiness, are exalted themes for contemplation. These will strengthen the intellect, and bring man into close communion with the Infinite One.--Review and Herald, June 21, 1877. {FE 49.2}

What are we to contemplate:
His love, yes,
Also the beauty of His holiness
His mercy
His justice
truth
purity

Then why are there so many denominations, all teaching that God is love, but coming to so many different conclusions as to what is truth?

Again, you speak of God, Who is perfect, His love is perfect, and everything He does is based in His love. That is true enough.
I'm not worried about God's love, it's NOT His love that is in question.

It's the thought that OUR love somehow supercedes God's commands.




It's people who only focus on God' love, and not His justice and holiness who lose their way and find a different god.

having read through these posts several times now i get the distinct impression that what we are "arguing" about is your preconceived notions of what is believed by some of us.

it seems that if anyone says "love" you hear self-centered, worldly love, new-age, new theology. i cant help how the enemy has counterfeited and led many astray. i cant let that stop me from studying Christ and "by beholding we become".

how can there possibly be any kind of discussion if one is not hearing, nor responding to what is said, but to what is going on in their mind?

i am at a complete loss as to how you have not picked up that we do not have limited sickly view of Godly love, which is under discussion, and our goal. nor do i understand where you have gotten the idea that any of us believe we have it. we are to study the life of Christ and as far as ive seen that pretty well covers every aspect you have mentioned.

and lest i be misunderstood yet again, i am in no way saying the rest of the bible should be neglected.

there is much more to it than that. for one thing most churches teach an eternally burning hell for the lost. but we know why there are so many denominations. it is because each would only grow so far then stopped. then persecuted those who discovered more truth.



who on earth ever said that, or even hinted at it?



that would depend on what anyones definitions of "justice", "love" and we are talking of Gods love, and "holiness" are as to whether they are being neglected or not, or how they are even separate and not parts of each other.

I think tq is on the money in post #113145 - what we are "arguing" about is your preconceived notions of what is believed by some of us.

You say, "It's the thought that OUR love somehow supercedes God's commands." I've been discussing, and sometimes disagreeing, with the people on this thread for a while, and I can guarantee that you are the only one with that thought.

Colin said, "Thus the opposite of sin is agape." Tom echoed, "I think agape would be the opposite of sin." If I know these guys at all, they weren't talking about "OUR love" as superseding God's commands. Rather, they were talking about GOD'S love being the opposite of sin.

You said, "Love can never stand alone." You must be talking about human-defined love. True, that can never stand alone. But then, that cannot rightly be called love. Many might think it is love, but it is not.

When we speak of love, we are talking of God's love - God is love. That human abomination that contradicts God's commands is not what WE have in mind. It seems, however, that that's what you have in mind when you think of "love." It might be called love, but it is not.

Time is short. It is time we straighten out what love really means. It is time for us to leave behind our erroneous concepts of what love is, and really get to know Him who is love.

No God, no love.
Know God, know love.

Because they don't know God.

I'm not so sure we can say that --
Some of those people are more "in love" with Christ then you'll hear and see in most Adventist Churches. It can put one to shame how easily they talk about God's goodness and bring it into their daily conversation in a radiant real life way. Yet, they their beliefs often diverge into areas I don't see as Biblical.

No, I'm not judging the spiritual condition of anyone. After all I don't know any of you personally.
Nor, have I ever said that this love is "self-centered, worldly love".
I did say that even our BEST concept of love falls far short of God's love and is not a reliable guide, we still need a reliable "measuring rod" (as in God's Word and commandments) to check that we are on the path of righteousness.










No one is trying to stop you from studying Christ and by beholding become changed.

That's my point -- we must never let "love", even when we're convinced it's the right kind of love, be the standard, we must always study Christ, His Word, His law, if we want to be changed into His image.

Yet, when people tell me God's Word and commands are not above our love, what am I supposed to think? And I have been told that.



So everyone is responding to what is going on their mind.




See -- you are responding to what's in your mind, not to what I said. No where have I said you have a "sickly view of Godly love".
My point was that people can never have the right view of Godly love unless they subject their ideas of that love to God's Word and law.

That was my point from the start -- OUR love, must be subjected to God's Word and commands, or it will lead astray.

Then I was told (not by you) that love is not bound by law, but love, as defined by God, determines what the law is to be.

I'm sorry but that statement troubles me.
I don't care how noble (not sickly but NOBLE) our love is, it can never, never place itself as the definer of God's law.





No, we don't have godly love, we fall far far far short, and that's why we NEED to place our love under the searching light of God's Word and law. Why are people (not you) telling me that I'm "putting the cart before the horse" and "preaching another gospel" by saying we can't make our love the standard, but that we must compare it TO GOD'S WORD and law? That God's commands and Word must take precedence or be placed above our love.


I fully agree we need to study the life and teachings of Christ.




Indeed it shouldn't be neglected, that includes giving serious thought and study to the prophecies, and to Christ's ministry in the heavenly sanctury, as well as many other portions.

The books of Daniel and Revelation, we are told, are to receive serious study -- they deal with Great Controversy issues, Christ's heavenly ministry, and with God's judgments and final acts of putting an end to sin forever, and establishing a new heaven and earth.

We must always place our love under the scrutiny of God's Word, and let the Holy Spirit guide us THROUGH God's Word and commandments to change.

noone said you were judging the spiritual condition of anyone and so is not valid in this discussion. my point for your next sentence was that something else was going on in your mind that had nothing to do with what was said.



noone said our best concept of love was any kind of guide for anything-again that is what you are hearing for some reason. we need to study the life of Christ who the messenger of the Lord said was a blend of the law and the gospel.


again noone said anyone was trying to stop me from anything. i was making a point, again, that you completely missed, it seems.



it wasnt in this thread unless you misread someones point.

much of this is just saying the same thing over and over with some ungodly acts.



Christs life determines what the law means. as we humans do not have the right view of love, we also do not have the right view of the law. we are no more capable of judging love by the law than we are of being able to judge the law by love. and we are not even capable of rightly understanding Christs life, the bible or anything else without second-by-second surrender to God and the Holy Spirit.



noone did. you saw "our love" but noone said it.





do you deep down feel inferior to others?

or do you just think you know, others dont, so you have to tell them?

do you know how to enter into a discussion and share ideas, or even disagree, without making the other person less than you?

But you have not been told that here. "Our love" has not been the focus here, except by you. You are the only who keeps bringing it up.

Look at what you said above. You were talking about Christ's word and Christ's law in order to be changed into Christ's image. Then you switch to "our" love. How about sticking with the motif and focusing on Christ's love? Then we will all be talking about the same thing.


Here you pull to old switcheroo again. Based on some of your earlier posts, I thought you were an experienced logician. But here you fall for one of the biggest fallacies - switching definitions.

We were talking about God's love determining what the law should be. God's love, God's law. Jesus said that the law hangs on the principle of love. It's pretty basic.

But then you switch over to "our" love again. You say that should not define God's law. Welcome to the club; we all believe that.

Unless you believe that "God's love" and "our love" are equivalent, you have fallen for a fallacy. And it is that fallacy that has driven the opposition against what you have been saying.

Because we're talking about different things, your rejection of my statements regarding the relationship between God's love and God's law is unfounded. It may turn out in the end that we have significant disagreements, but as it stands, you are fighting against a sentiment that nobody here holds.

This is irrelevant to your question. You asked why there are so many denominations, if people are dwelling on God's love. First of all, it wasn't asserted that people *were* dwelling on God's love, but we'll let that go. Your question is why, then, are there so many denominations. The answer is because they (the people that form the denominations) don't know God (don't know the truth about Him). If they did, they'd all join the same denomination, of course.

This doesn't mean there aren't true followers of God who belong to different denominations, are Catholic, or, for that matter, Buddhists or even Atheists. That's not the point.

We have such a reliable "measuring rod" in Jesus Christ, to check that we are on the path of righteousness.



This mentions both the law and Jesus Christ. The Pharisees used the law as a "measuring rod," but got it all wrong. There's nothing wrong with the law, but without Christ, it will just make us into Pharisees. The true goal is to walk as He walked. Now, since Christ walked in perfect harmony to the law, in Christ we have the true picture of the "measuring rod."

Another way of seeing the importance of Christ is to remember that love is the fulfilling of the law. In Christ, we see the love of God poured out. By receiving Christ, that love can be shed about in our hearts, and by beholding Him, we can be transformed into the same image.

Welcome to my world.

you make the point in the pages following this post that "our love" cannot be the basis for what is right or wrong. i believe everyone here agrees with that.

can we also agree that noone was referring to "our love" but the concept of love presented in the bible?




i cant see anyone disagreeing with this. but by the same token ones idea of "righteousness" can be severely warped. far too many times it is just a word without any true conception of what it means by the user. or, as you stated, "Jer. 17:9 The heart is deceitful...."



i have to disagree with this because it leads to scary conclusions for me. it is basically saying that "love" is wrong. adams love was not a lack of trust and reliance upon God. adam could have, in spite of his love for eve and not wanting to be separated from her, still trusted and obeyed God.

as stated above the statement makes love wrong. and i cant believe that at that point in time adams love was "sinful" or wrong. it would have made him a sinner before he disobeyed God and ate the apple. we are not told that is so anywhere.

but since the fall "our love" is certainly sinful. nevertheless whatever real love we do possess is not wrong, only which way we choose to go because of that love.

the ultimate conclusion one would come to from that statement is that we should not love because it makes us do wrong. there is the possibility we will do wrong because we love, but doing wrong is not the ultimate result of love.

the lesson from adams mistake that we all need to learn is to trust God no matter how badly it may hurt, as with abraham and isaac. we should also probably put ourselves in adams shoes and have a little sympathy for his situation. playing the "blame game" does not in any way change the results of their actions. but acknowledging that we might have reacted the same exact way were we in his situation might go a long ways towards our own healing and restoration into Gods image.

what we need to overcome is not loving because it many times hurts very badly. if God didnt love because it can hurt so bad where would we be?