Well written. Defining terms helps clarify. Unfortunately we have a very fuzzy understanding of what “love” truly means. I especially appreciate your point about looking down the road at the destination. But I have experienced the truth-without-love folks, and that’s pretty hurtful as well. Often it’s not very truthful, or at least it is missing a part of the truth.
So convenient that the "uncomfortable truths" are the ones you happen to agree with. They don't seem uncomfortable to you at all. If only we could all be born so favored by God as to never disagree with him 🙄
I always appreciate your posts. The definition I use for "love" is, 'Love means doing what is in someone else's best interest inspite of what it might cost you.' I derived this definition from John 3:16. Allow me to unpack it.
Love means "doing" (love is not a 'feeling,' it is an action). God "so loved the world" that He did something, "He sent His only begotten Son." Did this decision 'cost Him'? Clearly, yes! Yet He did it because it was in our ('best interest,' i.e. "have eternal life")? Nothing else could have accomplished mankind's salvation (although many things have been tried; good works, law-keeping, etc.). Only God's "love" for us, as expressed by the sending of His Son, in spite of what this decision would cost Him, could make our salvation possible!
If we then accept this definition of love, we will make it our purpose to always do what it is in the best interest of others, in spite of what that might cost us. The price we pay for loving people could be high. Teaching/preaching the truth could turn people away from it. Yet Jesus didn't go running after those "...of His disciples withdrew, and were not walking with Him anymore" saying, 'Maybe I came on a little too strong.' Yes, we must not be cruel or abrasive in our manner, for this would not be in their best interest either.
This same love could cost us our job (whether spiritual or secular). It could cost us life-long friends, and there are many other situations could illustrate the high price of love. But if we truly "love" others the way God loves them, then no price is too great to pay!
This is why the Greeks had so many words for our word “love.” What the LGBTQ+ people don’t mean the same as we do when we say “love.” The Greeks called that “eros” which meant SEXUAL love. We get the word “erotic” from it. So many people take advantage of the confusion of the various definitions to pretend we are talking about the same thing, when in reality we are talking about definitions of “love” that are WORLDS apart. https://www.womenshealthmag.com/sex-and-love/a46042560/greek-words-for-love/
Is love merely "a genuine desire for the other person’s ultimate best interest?" I might have a genuine desire for a person who is shivering in the cold to have a coat, but if that desire isn't strong enough to move me to action, I'm not sure it would quality as love.
You seem to be saying that love is a desire for the other person's ultimate best interest that moves them (the lover) to action but that opens a-whole-nother can of worms. I think defining love is fraught. If a definition is necessary, we might be best served by using more specific terms like the Greek philosophers did: philia, eros, etc.
Thank you for being brave enough to post truth. None of this should be controversial but I know it probably is.
🎯
Well written. Defining terms helps clarify. Unfortunately we have a very fuzzy understanding of what “love” truly means. I especially appreciate your point about looking down the road at the destination. But I have experienced the truth-without-love folks, and that’s pretty hurtful as well. Often it’s not very truthful, or at least it is missing a part of the truth.
Definitely a problem when there's no love. All external, no internal.
A man of understanding.
Love is not love. Full stop.
So convenient that the "uncomfortable truths" are the ones you happen to agree with. They don't seem uncomfortable to you at all. If only we could all be born so favored by God as to never disagree with him 🙄
Do you disagree with what appear to you as socially uncomfortable truths?
I do not support many popular western views, but if its counternarratives come with pro russian propaganda, that element should be discarded.
I always appreciate your posts. The definition I use for "love" is, 'Love means doing what is in someone else's best interest inspite of what it might cost you.' I derived this definition from John 3:16. Allow me to unpack it.
Love means "doing" (love is not a 'feeling,' it is an action). God "so loved the world" that He did something, "He sent His only begotten Son." Did this decision 'cost Him'? Clearly, yes! Yet He did it because it was in our ('best interest,' i.e. "have eternal life")? Nothing else could have accomplished mankind's salvation (although many things have been tried; good works, law-keeping, etc.). Only God's "love" for us, as expressed by the sending of His Son, in spite of what this decision would cost Him, could make our salvation possible!
If we then accept this definition of love, we will make it our purpose to always do what it is in the best interest of others, in spite of what that might cost us. The price we pay for loving people could be high. Teaching/preaching the truth could turn people away from it. Yet Jesus didn't go running after those "...of His disciples withdrew, and were not walking with Him anymore" saying, 'Maybe I came on a little too strong.' Yes, we must not be cruel or abrasive in our manner, for this would not be in their best interest either.
This same love could cost us our job (whether spiritual or secular). It could cost us life-long friends, and there are many other situations could illustrate the high price of love. But if we truly "love" others the way God loves them, then no price is too great to pay!
Rick Walker
Rickwalkerpreacher@gmail.com
This is why the Greeks had so many words for our word “love.” What the LGBTQ+ people don’t mean the same as we do when we say “love.” The Greeks called that “eros” which meant SEXUAL love. We get the word “erotic” from it. So many people take advantage of the confusion of the various definitions to pretend we are talking about the same thing, when in reality we are talking about definitions of “love” that are WORLDS apart. https://www.womenshealthmag.com/sex-and-love/a46042560/greek-words-for-love/
Is love merely "a genuine desire for the other person’s ultimate best interest?" I might have a genuine desire for a person who is shivering in the cold to have a coat, but if that desire isn't strong enough to move me to action, I'm not sure it would quality as love.
I would say that doesn't seem like a very genuine desire, meaning it falls short of the definition
You seem to be saying that love is a desire for the other person's ultimate best interest that moves them (the lover) to action but that opens a-whole-nother can of worms. I think defining love is fraught. If a definition is necessary, we might be best served by using more specific terms like the Greek philosophers did: philia, eros, etc.
Do you know anyone that views rape as loving?
That's truly awful that they would turn a blind eye to so much. Love does not allow the sheep to be devoured by wolves.
The weaponization of the word “love”… I’m sorry this has happened. 😢😞😞😞🙏🏽🙏🏽🙏🏽 And the devil laughs… 🔥🔥🔥
Praying 🙏🏽🙏🏽🙏🏽
Exactly.
"May the righteous strike me with mercy and discipline me;
It is oil for the head;
My head shall not refuse it,
For my prayer is still against their evil deeds."
- Psalm 141:5