what is love?

[Webers.Home]

.
● Titus 3:2 . . malign no one, be non-contentious, gentle, showing every
consideration for all men.

The Greek word for "malign" is blasphemeo (blas-fay-meh'-o) which means:
to vilify, defined by Webtser's as: to lower in estimation or importance,
and/or to utter abusive statements against. In other words; blasphemeo is
talking about tearing people down and changing people's impression of
them; mostly for the worse. There's a lot of that goes on in the world of
politics.

It probably goes without saying that the kind of vilification were talking
about here is mean-spirited and unwarranted. For example; is it tearing a
Ponzi scheme mogul like Bernie Madoff down to say that he's a louse of
marginal integrity who can't be trusted with other people's money? No; the
man has been proven to be exactly that.

"non-contentious" refers to peaceable; i.e. not ready to fight at the drop of a
hat.

"gentle" actually means mild, i.e. temperate: exercising self restraint; viz:
controlling one's impulses.

"showing every consideration" is simply making an effort to avoid hurting
people's feelings for no good reason. This no doubt includes courtesy along
with keeping a civil tongue in one's head.
_

 

[oldethennew]

ROM. 12:3.
For I say, through the Grace given unto me, to every man that is among you, not to think of himself
more highly than he ought to think; but to think soberly, according as
God hath dealt to every man the measure of Faith.
1COR. 4:6.
And these things, brethren, I have in a figure transferred to myself and to Apollos for your sakes;
that you might learn in us not to think above that which is written,
that no one of you be puffed up for one against another.

 

[Webers.Home]

.
● Titus 3:15 . . Greet them that love us in the faith.

Heretics are of course excluded from the group that Paul labeled "them that
love us in the faith". It would be a sin to require believers to say hello to
them for Paul; since his orders are to shun heretics. He didn't want to know
them anymore. They were not his favorite kinds of Christians.

You know what that says to me? It says to me that heretics are even less
acceptable than a stranger because Christ instructed his disciples to greet
strangers.

● Matt 5:47 . . And if you greet your brethren only, what do you do more
than others? Do not even the publicans do so?

So heresy is pretty serious.
_

 

[Webers.Home]

.
● Philem 1:1-25

In the little communiqué to his friend Philemon, Paul went to bat for a
runaway slave named Onesimus. By all rights, Philemon could legally, under
Roman law, put Onesimus to death; but as Onesimus' fellow believer, and
his sibling around the table in God's home, Philemon was bound by a higher
sense of duty and association.

Onesimus ran away prior to his conversion to Christianity. Had he been a
Christian, he would have been mindful of Eph 6:5-8, Col 3:22-25, 1Tim 6:1-
2, and Titus 2:9-10a and not run away.

Now that Onesimus was a fellow believer, Philemon was obligated to comply
with Eph 6:9a, and Col 4:1.

You know, I keep using words like "obligated" but though that word is
appropriate, it shouldn't have to be emphasized because Christianity is
supposed to be a religion of devotion rather than obligation.

● Gal 5:13 . . By love serve one another.

Israel's covenanted law requires people to love others as themselves; but
Jesus commands believers to love their fellow believers with the same
degree of love with which he himself loves them.

● John 15:12 . . My command is this: Love each other as I have loved you.

That being the case, it must have been very easy for Philemon to let
bygones be bygones and welcome Onesimus back into his home.

When Onesimus became Philemon's fellow believer, the nature of their
association took on a whole other dimension; viz: every one of the
commands that I've posted up till now, in regards to believers associating
with one another, came into play at the moment of Onesimus' conversion.

He and Philemon would never again relate to one another the same as
before Onesimus' conversion. Where once Onesimus and Philemon were
merely fellow men; in Christ they became siblings, and both will one day sit
side by side, shoulder to shoulder as equals around the table in God's home.

● Philem 1:15-16 . . For perhaps he therefore departed for a season, that
thou shouldest receive him for ever; not now as a slave, but above a slave,
a brother beloved, specially to me, but how much more unto thee, both in
the flesh, and in The Lord?

As a conscientious Christian, Onesimus no doubt became a real asset
because it wouldn't be necessary for Philemon to ever again beat an honest
day's work out of him.

● 1Tim 6:1-2 . . All who are under the yoke of slavery should consider their
masters worthy of full respect, so that God's name and our teaching may not
be slandered. Those who have believing masters are not to show less
respect for them because they are brothers. Instead, they are to serve them
even better, because those who benefit from their service are believers, and
dear to them.
_

 

[Webers.Home]

.
● Heb 10:24 . . Let us consider how we may spur one another on toward
love and good deeds.

Man is a species of life that is quite naturally, and comfortably, inclined to
provoke and annoy each other and bring out the worst in their fellow men. It
is Christ's wishes that his own make an effort to do just the opposite; viz:
bring out the best in each other.
_

 

[Webers.Home]

.
● Heb 10:25 . . Let us not give up meeting together, as some are in the
habit of doing, but let us encourage one another-- and all the more as you
see the Day approaching.

When my brother and I were growing up, we shared the same bedroom.
Well, one day our parents decided to separate us, so they moved my brother
to another room. When I asked them why; they said it was because we egg
each other on. (I guess it was okay for my parents to egg themselves on but
not okay for us.)

Anyway, point being, the old strategy of divide and conquer still works even
to this day. It's much easier to be strong in a group of supportive friends
and allies than it is all alone when the only resources available are your own.
It's still true that two heads are better than one; plus, in a group, the right
kind of peer pressure can work to everyone's advantage.

For example, there was a time in America when it was mocked as hippy-ish
to subsist on organic food. But lately, organic has become so popular that
nobody feels weird anymore when they shop for it. That's what I mean by
the right kind of peer pressure.

Anyway; when people are isolated, they're much easier to suppress, and
prevent from conspiring against a common foe; which is why unions are
called "organized" labor. One or two workers alone against the front office
are probably going to get themselves crushed but when the entire workforce
is united in a common cause, it's not so easy for corporate bulldozers to
abuse human rights.

NOTE: The "day" the author spoke of is the Day Of The Lord, in which
several judgments are scheduled to take place. The one most pertinent to
Christ's people is their performance evaluation as per 1Cor 3:5-15, and the
one most pertinent to the world is the Tribulation depicted in the book of
Revelation, and the one most pertinent to the lost is their day in court as per
Rev 20:11-15; and the one most pertinent to Moses' people is a sort of Ellis
Island as per Ezek 20:33-44.
_

 

[morefaithrequired]

love is possible. dont give up on it

 

[Webers.Home]

.
● Heb 12:14a . . Pursue peace with all men,

The Greek word for "peace" is eirene (i-ray'-nay) and means not only a lack
of strife, but also the presence of prosperity; which implies always seeking
the good of others rather than only your own.

People of peace are in an advantageous category.

● Matt 5:9 . . Blessed are the peacemakers: for they shall be called the
children of God.
_

 

[Webers.Home]

.
● Heb 13:1 . . Let brotherly love continue.

The Greek word for "brotherly love" in that passage is philadelphia (fil-ad-el
fee'-ah) which refers to fraternal affection. Philadelphia is different than the
neighborly love required by Matt 19:19 and Matt 22:37-40.

The Greek word for "love" in those passages is agapao (ag-ap-ah'-o) which
doesn't necessarily contain the element of affection; rather, it's an
impersonal kind of love exemplified in behaviors like courtesy, kindness,
sympathy, civility, good will, and deference. In other words, you don't have
to be especially fond of your neighbor in order to comply with Matt 19:19
and Matt 22:37-40. (cf. Matt 5:43-48)

Philadelphia love is difficult because it requires the involvement of one's
affections, viz: their feelings rather than only their manners. A really good
example is located at John 16:27 where Jesus stated:

"Father himself loves you because you have loved me and have believed
that I came from God."

For those of us who grew up deprived of love; that passage is nigh unto
impossible to believe that God is actually, and truly, fond of us because of
our devotion to His son.

There's no fondness expressed in passages like John 3:16; which speaks of
benevolence but not necessarily fondness and affection. God cares for the
world, yes, but that doesn't mean that He likes the world. In point of fact,
God quite despises the world; it disgusts Him.
_

 

[IFOLLOWHIM]

 

[IFOLLOWHIM]

Thank you @Webers.Home !

 

[Webers.Home]

.
● Heb 13:2 . . Do not neglect to be hospitable with strangers; for by this
some have entertained angels without knowing it.

Webster's defines "hospitable" as: given to generous and cordial reception of
guests, promising or suggesting generous and friendly welcome, offering a
pleasant or sustaining environment.

Inviting strangers into one's own home could easily result in the murder of
your entire family, along with the theft of your belongings. So, I'm thinking
Heb 13:2 is not saying that; rather, it's talking about congregational homes;
viz: churches.

I think it's very important to make non members— visitors —feel at home in
your church: make them feel welcome to return. Not only is that the
neighborly thing to do, but you just never know if that next stranger through
the door was guided there by providence and has the potential to increase
your church's spiritual value to God.

Artists generally depict angels as heavenly creatures with wings and/or
aglow with some sort of ethereal light. But the Greek word doesn't always
indicate celestial beings, rather, it refers to all manner of messengers, e.g.
prophets (Matt 11:10), delegates (Luke 7:24), fire (Heb 1:7), ecclesiastic
authorities (Rev 1:20-3:14), visions (Rev 22:16), and even acts of God like
fire, wind, smoke, voices, and earthquakes. (Acts 7:53)
_

 

[Webers.Home]

.
● Heb 13:3 . . Remember prisoners, as though in prison with them; and
those who are ill-treated, since you yourselves also are in the body.

The prisoners mentioned are not just any jailbird in lock-up; but rather, it's
limited to those who are "in the body" viz: in Christ.

● Eph 5:30-32 . .We are members of his body. "For this reason a man will
leave his father and mother and be united to his wife, and the two will
become one flesh." This is a profound mystery-- but I am talking about
Christ and the church.

● 1Cor 12:12-13 . . For as the body is one, and hath many members, and all
the members of that one body, being many, are one body: so also is Christ.
For by one Spirit are we all baptized into one body

The tenor of the command is, I think, restricted to Christians mistreated
and/or confined for their religious beliefs and practices rather than actual
crimes. There's a lot of that sort of thing going on today in Muslim countries.
America is well-known for its religious tolerance, but other countries; not so
much.
_

 

[Webers.Home]

.
● Heb 13:4 . . Let marriages be respected: and the bed kept unsoiled; for
God will judge the adulterer and all the sexually immoral.

A number of despicable behaviors are listed in the 18th chapter of Leviticus;
and one of them-- listed right along with incest and LGBT --is adultery.

Rom 1:18 says that the wrath of God is revealed from heaven against all
ungodliness and unrighteousness of men, and goes on to list not only LGBT
as one of those ungodly, unrighteous behaviors worthy of the wrath of God,
but also sexual impurity and the degrading of people's bodies with one
another. Sexual impurity and degradation includes not only sleeping around
and/or cohabitating, but also adultery.

Some Christians don't know the meaning of "respect" when it comes to
marriage. It means to treat someone else's spouse as a sacred object. I've
seen for myself how some Christians think it's terrible to trespass on private
property and/or steal the silverware when they're invited over for dinner;
but at the same time get just a bit too chummy with their host's spouse.

There's a popular song going around with these words:

You don't own me,
I'm not just one of your many toys.
You don't own me,
Don't say I can't go with other boys.

The lyrics of that song-- originally recorded by Lesley Gore in 1963 --depict
a defiant girl standing up to a possessive boyfriend. Well; those lyrics may
be true for temporary lovers; but are very contrary to God's thinking when it
comes to marriage.

There is no Hebrew word for either husband or wife in the Old Testament.
No, the English words for husband and wife are derived from the presence of
gender-sensitive possessive pronouns; viz: her and his.

● Gen 2:24 . . Therefore a man shall leave his father and mother and be
joined to his wife, and they shall become one flesh.

The Hebrew word for "wife" in that passage is 'ishshah (ish-shaw') which just
simply indicates a female; regardless of age. The possessive pronoun "his"
makes the 'ishshah somebody's wife. i.e. his woman.

● Gen 3:6 . . And when the woman saw that the tree was good for food, and
that it was pleasant to the eyes, and a tree to be desired to make one wise,
she took of the fruit thereof, and did eat, and gave also unto her husband
with her; and he did eat.

The Hebrew word for "husband" in that verse is 'enowsh (en-oshe') which
just simply indicates a mortal; viz: a guy, a male; regardless of age. The
possessive pronoun "her" makes the 'enowsh somebody's husband, i.e. her
man.

So the principle of possession is a key element in marriage; and adulterers
are nothing in the world but thieves. In point of fact, in 2007, when a
suburban Chicago man, Arthur Friedman, found out his wife was cheating on
him with another man named German Blinov, he was heartbroken. But
unlike many other people, Friedman didn't "get over" it. Instead, he filed a
lawsuit against Mr. Blinov for stealing the love and affections of his wife. A
Cook County jury ordered Blinov to pay a total $4,802 to Mr. Friedman for
stealing his wife.

While the idea of suing your wife's or husband's lover for stealing their
affections might sound ridiculous, it is indeed quite legal to do so. Mr.
Friedman used a lesser-known state law to attack and sue his wife's lover.
The law is called the "alienation of affection" law. In fact, there are eight of
these types of laws across the United States. It allows violated spouses to
seek damages for the loss of love to a wife or husband's lover.

● 1Cor 7:4 . . The wife does not have authority over her own body, but the
husband does; and likewise also the husband does not have authority over
his own body, but the wife.

A wedding vow then, could be said to be a transfer of ownership just like
signing over the pink slip to a car or the deed to real estate. So then, always
keep those possessive pronouns in mind when associating with somebody
else's spouse; and keep your pea-pickin' paws off the merchandise!
_

 

[NayborBear]

Love, can also teach. Much like the love a parent shows a child in needs of "discipline."
"This is gonna hurt me, more then it's going to hurt you!"
Which is deemed "alright" coming from a parent.
Not deemed so alright, coming from one believer to another.

 

[Webers.Home]

.
● Jas 2:1 . . My brethren, have not the faith of our Lord Jesus Christ-- The
Lord of glory --with respect of persons.

The Greek word for "respect of persons" is prosopolepsia (pros-o-pol-
ape-see’-ah) which means: partiality.

Webster’s defines "partiality" as: partisan, prejudiced, biased, and/or
granting one person more value as a human being than another in regards
to particulars like age, race, gender, looks, size, education, intellect, bank
account, career, clothing, popularity, neighborhood, and social status.

● Jas 2:2-4 . . For instance, suppose someone comes into your meeting
dressed in flashy clothing and expensive jewelry, and another comes in who
is low-income and dressed in shabby clothes. If you give special attention
and a good seat to the rich person, but you say to the poor one, "You can
stand over there, or else sit on the floor" --well, doesn’t this kind of
discrimination show that you are guided by wrong motives?

When I first began attending church as an adult back in the decade of the
1970's, my wardrobe consisted entirely of shirts and trousers that I bought
on the cheap at Value Village-- a popular second hand store on the west
coast the same as Salvation Army and Goodwill.

I never told anybody where I shopped, although I've no doubt that some of
the folk I encountered in church could tell that my fashions were a tad out of
date because there were some upper income people attending that looked a
whole lot nicer than me; but I figured: what the hay; I had as much right to
attend in my previously-owned clothing as they did in their untainted high
end threads.

Some of them had gold watches too while I sported a simple Timex with an
imitation leather strap; and I drove an aging 1968 VW Beetle that needed
paint. You know, looking back on that era, I sometimes wonder how many
people avoided me without my knowing it because of all that.
_

 

[Webers.Home]

.
● Jas 2:12 . . So speak and so act, as those who are to be judged by the law
of liberty.

The law of liberty is different than the law of the covenant that Moses'
people agreed upon with God as Exodus, Leviticus, Numbers, and
Deuteronomy. That law is depicted in the New Testament as a law of
bondage rather than freedom. (Gal 5:1)

Within the context of James' epistle, the law of liberty-- a.k.a. Christ's law
(Rom 8:2) --judges Christians by how they treat other people in accord with
how Christ wants them to be treated in his name.

NOTE: There are Christians out there who are so uncivil, so
uncompromising, and so lacking the milk of human kindness, that they
would actually be doing Christ service by not identifying themselves with
him. Compare Mark 3:11-12 where Jesus commanded some evil spirits to
keep their mouth shut about his identity.
_

 

[Webers.Home]

.
● Jas 3:13-18 . .Who among you is wise and understanding? Let him show
by his good behavior his deeds in the gentleness of wisdom. But if you have
bitter rivalry and selfish ambition in your heart, do not be arrogant and so lie
against the truth. This wisdom is not that which comes down from above,
but is earthly, natural, demonic. For where rivalry and selfish ambition exist,
there is disorder and every evil thing.

. . . But the wisdom from above is first pure, then peaceable, gentle,
reasonable, full of compassion and good fruits, unwavering, without
hypocrisy. And the seed whose fruit is righteousness is sown in peace by
those who make peace.

The "seed whose fruit is righteousness" is oftentimes not sown in peace on
internet forums; nor is it sown on internet forums by people who make
peace. It's sown by flaming, competitive, assertive, confrontational people--
toxic, impulsive, mean-spirited personalities given to rejoinders, demeaning
comments, recriminations and fault finding. And if there's a problem, it's
never them; no, you are the problem, and for them; turning the other cheek
is no longer in vogue.

Those kinds of people do not like to be wrong, nor can they even think of
themselves as wrong, nor are they likely to admit when they're wrong
because they're really not all that interested in the truth; but only in
defending their version of the truth; viz: their truth is far more important to
them than even the God's truth; and should you not accept their truth, then
it's because you have no understanding and need to come to your senses.
These people are neither wise nor gentle. They'll ride rough-shod over your
feelings like a skate-boarder barreling through Autumn leaves on the
sidewalk. It's just awful how little they care for the injuries their attitude and
their choice of words cause others.

People who take it upon themselves to teach, preach, and/or discuss the
Bible ought to be sensible, and they ought to exemplify the Gospel. They
can't be doing it for the prestige, showing off, impressing their friends,
and/or competing with a rival. They have to be honest and forthright. They
have to have a heart, they have to be dedicated and reliable: they cannot be
vacillating, they have to practice what they preach, and they cannot be
sarcastic, obtuse, difficult, contrary, quarrelsome, snobby, pretentious,
demeaning, domineering, despotic, assertive, confrontational, stubborn,
militant, pernicious, or pugnacious.

Christians that teach and/or discuss the Bible with others really ought to be
someone they can trust, and someone with whom they may speak their
minds without fear of reprisals instead of someone in whose presence
everybody has to walk on egg shells all the time.
_

 

[IFOLLOWHIM]

 

[Webers.Home]

.
● Jas 4:11a . . Do not speak evil of one another, brethren.

The koiné Greek word for "speak evil" is katalaleo (kat-al-al-eh'-o) which
means: a traducer, a slanderer.

Webster's defines "slander" as: the utterance of false charges or
misrepresentations which defame and/or damage another's reputation
and/or a false and defamatory oral statement about a person; viz: libel.

Webster's defines "libel" as: 1) a written or oral defamatory statement or
representation that conveys an unjustly unfavorable impression, and 2) a
statement or representation published without just cause and tending to
expose another to public contempt.

According to Webster's, a statement (or a photograph) need not be untrue
to qualify as libel. If the statement, and/or the photograph, is unnecessarily
denigrating and/or embarrassing to someone, though it be 100% true, then
it qualifies as libel.

There are some things we could say about others that, though true, aren't
necessary. For example, if you were to inadvertently see one of the ladies in
the office scratching an itch on her derriere; is it really necessary to go
blabbing about it all over the office? (cf. Gen 9:20-22)

No; and in point of fact, to do so would be libelous, not to mention possibly
in violation of local labor laws banning the fomentation of a hostile
workplace; and these days, it could even be construed as sexual misconduct.
If that lady ever found out you were blabbing about her derriere she might
be so mortified as to make it difficult for her to show up for work.

Some years ago when I was working as a welder/ship fitter in a family
owned boatyard on Shelter Island in San Diego, one of the boss' adolescent
sons came out on a skiff I was helping to construct. He remarked to one of
the men standing there, in my hearing, that I looked stupid.

Do I look stupid? Yes, I do. It's been a curse my entire life. So then, what
the boss' son said was true. But was it necessary? No; it was thoroughly
unnecessary, and in point of fact his thoughtless remark cut me deeply; but
what could I do? He was the boss' son. Anon, that boy grew up to become
one of worst cases of male vanity it has been my misfortune to encounter in
life. Though he came of a good family, the boss' son had the nature of a
churl; through and through.

Words are weapons,
Sharper than knives.
The Devil Inside
Andrew Farriss and Michael Hutchence
INXS
_