NOTE: In this entry, I use words like satisfaction, pleasure, delight, joy... etc. more or less interchangeably. I happened to use "pleasure" as the dominant term, but please keep note that any of the terms above could have been used instead.)
This entry may seem to take a while to get to "Finding your delight in the delight of another as the definition of love" so I want to give a brief outline to see how I am intending to progress toward this end:
I) We are to view following Christ not as sacrifice, but as pursuing superior pleasure because the pleasures from God are greater than the pleasures from sin.
II) Since the pleasures from God are, in general, greater than the pleasures from sin, we can assume that the pleasures of loving are greater than the pleasures of selfishness.
III) Doing something because it brings you greater (godly) pleasure is a Biblical motive.
IV) Therefore, from II and III, it is Biblical that your motivation for loving be because the godly pleasure of love is greater than the sinful pleasure of selfishness.
V) Defining love as "Finding your delight in the delight of another" preserves the Biblical motive for loving.
VI) What this definition means in the context of our love for others, our love for God, and God's love for us.
I) We are to view following Christ not as sacrifice, but as pursuing superior pleasure because the pleasures from God are greater than the pleasures from sin.
The Rebuke
28And Peter said, "See, we have left our homes and followed you." 29And he said to them, "Truly, I say to you, there is no one who has left house or wife or brothers or parents or children, for the sake of the kingdom of God, 30who will not receive many times more in this time, and in the age to come eternal life." (Luke 18:28-30)
This passage follows the story of the rich young man. You can read the story in Luke 18, but in summary a rich young man comes to Jesus and asks how to be saved. Jesus, perceiving that the man loved money, and not God, said that he must sell all his possessions, give them to the poor, and come follow Jesus. (Selling all your possessions is not how one is saved. The point is that you must release whatever you worship and adore, in this case, money, and worship and adore Jesus instead.) The man was not willing to give up his possessions, and the Word says that he became "very sad." Seeing his response, Jesus comments, " How difficult it is for those who have wealth to enter the kingdom of God! For it is easier for a camel to go through the eye of a needle than for a rich person to enter the kingdom of God." (verses 24-25). The disciples are shocked, because in their eyes, if it was hard for the rich to get into the kingdom of heaven, then how could anyone? 'Those who heard it said, "Then who can be saved?" But he [Jesus] said, "What is impossible with men is possible with God." ' (26-27)
This is the point where Peter says, "See, we have left our homes and followed you." He is expecting a commendation from Jesus. I think this is where Peter's heart is at this point: "We were willing to make the sacrifice that he was not willing to make. We were willing to give up our previous lives, but he wasn't. Aren't you impressed, Jesus, with how we sacrificed all we had when we decided to follow you?" Peter is expecting a pat on the back. But instead, Jesus gives him perhaps one of the stranger rebukes in Scripture. Jesus says, in essence, "Do you think this is a sacrifice? Do you not know that you will be richly rewarded?" Jesus rebukes Peter for thinking that following him is a sacrifice, rather than a pursuit of satisfaction and delight.
Here is my point from this passage. Peter perceived following Christ as sacrifice. Christ rebuked Peter for that perspective, and told him to perceive the Christian life rather as giving up inferior pleasure for superior pleasure.
Do we think of giving up inferior pleasures for superior pleasures as sacrifice?
Consider the following situation:
You are looking for an apartment in a new city, and are not having great success. Your job starts in a week, and you have not been able to find a reasonable apartment anywhere, except one. The rent is $1100 a month, which is a lot more that it should be. It's 45 minutes from where you work. The walls are painted a weird yellow-green, the paint is peeling, and there's a weird smell in the bedroom. It's right by the train tracks, and shakes every time a train goes by, which is about every thirty minutes. And this is your prospective home. Then one day, when you are about to sign the lease, you get a call from a future co-worker who knows you are looking for an apartment. He suggests you check this new place out. He tells you it's 10 minutes from work, and he's heard the rent is reasonable. You decided to check it out. And you find that the rent is $500 a month, and it's bigger, nicer, and cleaner than the other apartment. There are no weird smells, you love the decor and the color, and there are no train tracks for miles around.
Now consider this: Would you consider exchanging the bad apartment for the good one as a sacrifice? No! We frequently exchange something that is good for something that is better. We do not see it as a sacrifice. When we give up something that is inferior in every way to something that is superior in every way, we do not consider it to be sacrifice.
Is sin like the nice apartment and God like the crumby one?
No! The pleasures of God are superior to the pleasures of the sin in every respect. The pleasures from knowing, following, trusting, and obeying God, are greater than the pleasures of knowing, following, trusting, and obeying sin.
The two primary ways that something can be superior to something else is in quality and in quantity. Hebrews 10 says, "you joyfully accepted the plundering of your property, since you knew that you yourselves had a better possession and an abiding one." This verse does not speak of sin directly, but consider that if they had not done what was stated in the verse above, i.e. if they had not "joyfully accepted... knowing that you had a better possession..." then a heart that coveted riches would have been revealed; a sinful heart would have been revealed. So notice why the Hebrews joyfully accepted the plundering of their property: They know they had a better possession and an abiding one. They knew the value of knowing Christ was greater in quality ("better") and in quantity ("abiding"). The "better" cannot be due to the fact that the possession lasts longer, because "better" and "abiding" are stated separately. The possession must be better in some way other than the lastingness of the possession, or else saying that it is "better" and "abiding" would be redundant.
There are other places in Scripture that we see that the pleasures of God are greater than the pleasures of sin:
We are offered pleasures from the world...
"24By faith Moses... [chose] rather to be mistreated with the people of God than to enjoy the fleeting pleasures of sin." (Hebrews 11:24-25)
...and pleasures from God...
" 11You make known to me the path of life;
in your presence there is fullness of joy;
at your [God's] right hand are pleasures forevermore." (Psalm 16:11)"
Notice that the pleasures of God in these verses are shown to be better quantitatively.
The pleasures of God are also shown to be better qualitatively:
1 "Come, everyone who thirsts,
come to the waters;
and he who has no money,
come, buy and eat!
Come, buy wine and milk
without money and without price.
2 Why do you spend your money for that which is not bread,
and your labor for that which does not satisfy?
Listen diligently to me, and eat what is good,
and delight yourselves in rich food. " (Isaiah 55:1-2)
This word was spoken to a rebellious generation, who had turned to seeking satisfaction in things other than God, and was a beckoning call for them to return to that which satisfies, by virtue of the qualitative superiority of the pleasures of God.
The greatest contrast of the pleasures of God and the pleasures of the world, or sin, that I have found is this:
"12Be appalled, O heavens, at this;
be shocked, be utterly desolate,
declares the LORD, 13for my people have committed two evils: they have forsaken me,
the fountain of living waters,
and hewed out cisterns for themselves,
broken cisterns that can hold no water. (Jeremiah 2:12-13)
Which is better a fountain of living water, or a cistern that can hold no water? No contest!
II) Since the pleasures from God are, in general, greater than the pleasures from sin, we can assume that the pleasures of loving are greater than the pleasures of selfishness.
Having already demonstrated from Scripture that the quality and quantity of the pleasures of God are greater than those of sin, I think it is hard to imagine how the pleasures of selfishness are greater than the pleasures of loving. Perhaps a simple enough validification of the statement for the purposes of this blog would be something as follows:
1) God commands his people, above all else, to love him and others.
37Jesus replied: " 'Love the Lord your God with all your heart and with all your soul and with all your mind.' 38This is the first and greatest commandment. 39And the second is like it: 'Love your neighbor as yourself.' (Matthew 22:37-38)
2) He also commands his people to pursue that which satisfies.
2 Why do you spend your money for that which is not bread,
and your labor for that which does not satisfy?
Listen diligently to me, and eat what is good,
and delight yourselves in rich food. " (Isaiah 55:2)
3) Therefore, we can conclude that God's people are more satisfied by loving than by not loving.
If the pleasures of God are greater in every respect than the pleasures of sin, then it must follow that a given godly action must give greater pleasure than its sinful opposite.
III) Doing something because it brings you greater (godly) pleasure is a Biblical motive.
There are many, many verses in which the motivation which is condoned by God is one of pursuing that which is more satisfying. Remember, we have already shown that the pleasures that are most satisfying are godly pleasures, or pleasures in God. If we begin thinking that God's recommendation that we pursue our pleasure is in any way a license to sin, then we need to get on our knees and pray for God to reveal to us how superior the pleasures of God are over the pleasures of sin!
Verse: Whoever finds his life will lose it, and whoever loses his life for my sake will find it. (Matthew 10:39)
Action: Losing your life
Motivation: So that you will find it.
Verse: you joyfully accepted the plundering of your property, since you knew that you yourselves had a better possession and an abiding one. (Hebrews 10:34)
Action: Accepting the plundering of their property
Motivation: Since they had a better possession and an abiding one [i.e. hope of future glory]
Verse: 24By faith Moses, when he was grown up, refused to be called the son of Pharaoh’s daughter, 25 choosing rather to be mistreated with the people of God than to enjoy the fleeting pleasures of sin. 26 He considered the reproach of Christ greater wealth than the treasures of Egypt, for he was looking to the reward. (Hebrews 11:24-26)
Action: Choosing to be mistreated rather than enjoy the fleeting pleasures of sin [i.e. suffering for righteousness' sake]
Motivation: He was looking to the reward [i.e. hope of future glory]
Verse: Why do you spend your money for that which is not bread,
and your labor for that which does not satisfy?
Listen diligently to me, and eat what is good,
and delight yourselves in rich food. (Isaiah 55:2)
Action: Listen to God
Motivation: It satisfies!
Time would fail me to show all the places in Scripture where doing something because you will get greater joy out of it is given as a correct motive (See "Desiring God" by John Piper).
One reason why this motive is a (the?) correct one is because God is glorified as giver, not as recipient. Psalm 112:12-13 says, " 12What shall I render to the LORD for all his benefits to me? 13I will lift up the cup of salvation and call on the name of the LORD." In other words, I will lift up the empty cup of salvation, and ask the LORD to fill it! God has done such good to me! What will I do in response? Trust him for more! "God is not served by human hands, as though he needed anything, since he himself gives to all mankind life and breath and everything." (Acts 17:25)
IV) Therefore, from II and III, it is Biblical that your motivation for loving be because the godly pleasure of love is greater than the sinful pleasure of selfishness.
We have shown that the pleasures of God are greater than the pleasures of sin. We have also seen that it is commended in Scripture when people recognize this fact, and do that which is pleasing to God because it gives them greater pleasure. We can then say that, since the joy (on earth and in heaven, "better and abiding") from loving is greater than the joy from selfishness, that God condones the greater pleasure of loving as motivation for loving. Again, remember, this is true because love is a God-pleasing action. If we get "greater pleasure" from sinning, rather than obeying God's word, it is not because God is a liar, and sin is in fact more satisfying, but it it because our eyes have been blinded to to satisfaction and joy that comes from obeying God.
V) Defining love as "Finding your delight in the delight of another" preserves the Biblical motive for loving.
I have not said much using the word "delight" to this point. Perhaps that was a mistake. Anyway, as I noted at the beginning of the entry, I am using delight, pleasure, joy, satisfaction, etc. interchangeably.
I think this definition preserves the Biblical motive for loving for several reasons:
1) The Bible condones doing something because of the superior pleasure that comes from it
2) This definition does not put sacrifice into the definition of love (at the root level)
3) God cares greatly about our attitudes, not only our actions. But he does care about our actions too. This definition couples motivation with action, because if you truly delight in something, you will act to bring it about.
VI) What this definition means in the context of our love for others, our love for God, and God's love for us.
a) Love for others
In the context of loving others, the way to think about this definition of love is,
"Loving others is finding your delight in their godly, not sinful, delight"
There are fleeting pleasure and delights that world has to offer. If we are to love others, what we can do is show them how far superior the pleasures are that God has to offer! This is done by a demonstration of the superior pleasures of God in our life, and by preaching the Gospel so that they too may experience it. The same applies to believers: We want believers to experience the pleasures of God just as much as we want unbelievers to!
If what I have said in the previous sections is true, then the highest delight of others is to know, trust, and enjoy God. If we love others, we will delight in them knowing God. And if we delight in others knowing God, can we say that we are doing anything but loving them?
If God allows me to delight in you knowing Him, I will certainly be motivated (Biblically!) to help you find your delight in Him.
b) Love for God
Our love for God can be thought of this way,
"Loving God is finding your delight in that in which God delights"
I encourage you to read "The Pleasures of God" by John Piper. The book consists of things in which God takes pleasure, and we can too take pleasure in. And if we are delighting in that which God delights, we are loving him. Some of these "Pleasures of God" are listed below:
1: The Pleasure of God in His Son
2: The Pleasure of God in All He Does
3:The Pleasure of God in His Creation
4: The Pleasure of God in His Fame
5: The Pleasure of God in Election
6: The Pleasure of God in doing good to all who hope in him
7: The Pleasure of God in personal obedience and public justice
Is delighting in the "Pleasures of God" synonymous with loving God? Well, try it:
1: The Pleasure of Michelle in God's Son
2: The Pleasure of Michelle in All God Does
3:The Pleasure of Michelle in God's Creation
4: The Pleasure of Michelle in God's Fame
5: The Pleasure of Michelle in Election
6: The Pleasure of Michelle in trusting God to do good to all who hope in God
7: The Pleasure of Michelle in personal obedience and public justice
Sounds to me like Michelle loves God!
c) God's love for us
"God's love for us is his delighting in our delight... in him"
If Psalm 16:11-12 is true...
11You make known to me the path of life;
in your presence there is fullness of joy;
at your right hand are pleasures forevermore.
...then the greatest thing that God could give us is himself. Consider the logic in this verse: "He who did not spare his own Son but gave him up for us all, how will he not also with him graciously give us all things?" The logic is: If God gave us that which is most valuable and precious in the universe, namely, his Son, then surely he would not withhold lesser things from us!
So, in order for God to act toward us in love, he must give us nothing less than himself. As Augustine said,“Thou hast made us for thyself, O Lord, and our hearts are restless until they find their rest in thee..” If God gave us everything else we wanted, except for himself, he would be hating us. He would be giving us everything except that which satisfies.
The cry of Isaiah is my cry. It is the cry of God himself. God's Spirit delights in your satisfaction... and that satisfaction is in God! Hear the cry of love:
1 "Come, everyone who thirsts,
come to the waters;
and he who has no money,
come, buy and eat!
Come, buy wine and milk
without money and without price.
2 Why do you spend your money for that which is not bread,
and your labor for that which does not satisfy?
Listen diligently to me, and eat what is good,
and delight yourselves in rich food. " (Isaiah 55:1-2)
Oh, how great is God's love for us, that he would send his Son into the world, to enable us to turn from our broken cisterns that hold no water, and turn to him, the fountain of living water! Let us pursue that which satisfies!
Friday, June 25, 2010
Saturday, June 12, 2010
Is sacrifice the definition of love?
This post is motivated as a response to something I recently heard someone say. They said, "Sacrifice is the definition of love." I think that this definition is very easy to disprove Biblically, but I do not just want to say, "That's wrong" without presenting what I consider to be better definitions.
There is an abundance of literature available that discusses love , and I know that I am probably not saying anything too terribly unfamiliar.
Is sacrifice the definition of love?
There are two things that one could mean when one says "sacrifice is the definition of love". They arise from different interpretations of the word "definition". I will explain what these two are, and then show that in neither case is "sacrifice the definition of love".
"Definition" can be used as hyperbole, meaning that the thing referred to is the standard to which all other like things should attain. For example, if one says, "David is the definition of a man," it is unlikely that one means that all men, in order to be men, must be exactly in every way like David, but rather that David possesses qualities that are the standard by which other men should determine whether or not they are true men. This is usually used, as stated above, as hyperbole, to emphasize a point, and not to be taken literally.
An important thing to note about this interpretation is that it is not symmetrical. Saying that "David is the definition of a man," and "A man is the definition of David" do not mean the same thing when the word 'definition' is used in this way.
There is a stricter usage of the word "definition". This is probably quite obvious, but bear with me. The stricter usage is for two synonymous words or phrases, such as "The definition of philanthropy is 'an activity performed with the goal of promoting the well-being of fellow man.' " This meaning implies that if you do"an activity performed with the goal of promoting the well-being of fellow man" you have exactly done "philanthropy" and vice versa. If you have one, you have the other, because they are synonymous. This usage does not make use of hyperbole; the purpose of the dictionary in giving a definition is not the former of these two definitions, but the latter.
So when I heard it said, "Sacrifice is the definition of love" which of these two meanings did the word "definition" take? I would say it was the latter, but let us assume the former:
1) Assume: Sacrifice is the standard to which all love should attain.
This statement is saying that love, without sacrifice, is less than ideal love. If one examines one's love, and sees that it is not in accordance with the love of sacrifice, then one's love is lacking. I will come back to this definition later, and see whether or not it is Biblical, but for now, let us move on to the latter meaning of "definition".
2) Assume: If you sacrifice, you love, and vice versa. The two are synonymous.
This is the interpretation that I have a lot of trouble with, because it clearly goes against Scripture. Consider 1 Corinthians 13:3
"If I give away all I have, and if I deliver up my body to be burned, but have not love, I gain nothing."
What sacrifice! Paul expresses the possibility of giving away all he has, and delivering his body to be burned, i.e. sacrificing, and doing it without love! There is a possibility of sacrificing without loving, so the second meaning of "definition" is unscriptural. "Sacrifice" and "love" are not synonymous, because if two things are synonymous, then one cannot do one without doing the other. The second definition proves false.
Using the same text, let us examine the first definition: the standard to which all love should attain. Remember, this definition is not symmetrical. Let us reverse the statement above, and see which way is according to Scripture: Love is the standard to which all sacrifice should attain. Is this not in accordance with 1 Corinthians 13:3? Paul is writing this chapter in order to show the superiority, excellence, and necessity of love above all other things. The purpose of 1 Corinthians 13 is not to show that love is subordinate to other virtues or actions, but rather that it epitomizes, and is the sum of all other virtues. Biblically, sacrifice is not above love, nor are they equal. The first definition also proves false.
Why is this important?
I am not arguing here for the sake of argument. If the Bible says, "We know that we have passed out of death into life, because we love (agape) the brothers" (1 John 3:14) then it is vitally important to know what love is. And we do not know what Christian love is if our definition can be refuted by 1 Corinthians 13, or anywhere else in Scripture for that matter. I do not want anyone to think they have passed out of death into life because they force themselves to joylessly, bitterly, even spitefully "sacrifice" for another, (it is possible, have you never done it?) simply because they think that kind of "love" to guarantee their entrance into heaven!
Accurate, helpful definitions of love
In "Mere Christianity", C.S. Lewis gives a definition of love that I really like. Another definition that stems from the theology of John Piper is probably my favorite. I think it is useful to keep both of these definitions in mind because I think they lend themselves to application more easily in different circumstances. The definitions from Lewis and Piper1 are, respectively:
I) Desiring the good of another
II) Delighting in the delight of another
Desiring the good of another as the definition of love
Lewis says, "That is what is meant in the Bible by loving him: wishing his good..." This simple definition of love could change your life, if you read it in the context given below. I think it is worth quoting Lewis at length:
There is an abundance of literature available that discusses love , and I know that I am probably not saying anything too terribly unfamiliar.
Is sacrifice the definition of love?
There are two things that one could mean when one says "sacrifice is the definition of love". They arise from different interpretations of the word "definition". I will explain what these two are, and then show that in neither case is "sacrifice the definition of love".
"Definition" can be used as hyperbole, meaning that the thing referred to is the standard to which all other like things should attain. For example, if one says, "David is the definition of a man," it is unlikely that one means that all men, in order to be men, must be exactly in every way like David, but rather that David possesses qualities that are the standard by which other men should determine whether or not they are true men. This is usually used, as stated above, as hyperbole, to emphasize a point, and not to be taken literally.
An important thing to note about this interpretation is that it is not symmetrical. Saying that "David is the definition of a man," and "A man is the definition of David" do not mean the same thing when the word 'definition' is used in this way.
There is a stricter usage of the word "definition". This is probably quite obvious, but bear with me. The stricter usage is for two synonymous words or phrases, such as "The definition of philanthropy is 'an activity performed with the goal of promoting the well-being of fellow man.' " This meaning implies that if you do"an activity performed with the goal of promoting the well-being of fellow man" you have exactly done "philanthropy" and vice versa. If you have one, you have the other, because they are synonymous. This usage does not make use of hyperbole; the purpose of the dictionary in giving a definition is not the former of these two definitions, but the latter.
So when I heard it said, "Sacrifice is the definition of love" which of these two meanings did the word "definition" take? I would say it was the latter, but let us assume the former:
1) Assume: Sacrifice is the standard to which all love should attain.
This statement is saying that love, without sacrifice, is less than ideal love. If one examines one's love, and sees that it is not in accordance with the love of sacrifice, then one's love is lacking. I will come back to this definition later, and see whether or not it is Biblical, but for now, let us move on to the latter meaning of "definition".
2) Assume: If you sacrifice, you love, and vice versa. The two are synonymous.
This is the interpretation that I have a lot of trouble with, because it clearly goes against Scripture. Consider 1 Corinthians 13:3
"If I give away all I have, and if I deliver up my body to be burned, but have not love, I gain nothing."
What sacrifice! Paul expresses the possibility of giving away all he has, and delivering his body to be burned, i.e. sacrificing, and doing it without love! There is a possibility of sacrificing without loving, so the second meaning of "definition" is unscriptural. "Sacrifice" and "love" are not synonymous, because if two things are synonymous, then one cannot do one without doing the other. The second definition proves false.
Using the same text, let us examine the first definition: the standard to which all love should attain. Remember, this definition is not symmetrical. Let us reverse the statement above, and see which way is according to Scripture: Love is the standard to which all sacrifice should attain. Is this not in accordance with 1 Corinthians 13:3? Paul is writing this chapter in order to show the superiority, excellence, and necessity of love above all other things. The purpose of 1 Corinthians 13 is not to show that love is subordinate to other virtues or actions, but rather that it epitomizes, and is the sum of all other virtues. Biblically, sacrifice is not above love, nor are they equal. The first definition also proves false.
Why is this important?
I am not arguing here for the sake of argument. If the Bible says, "We know that we have passed out of death into life, because we love (agape) the brothers" (1 John 3:14) then it is vitally important to know what love is. And we do not know what Christian love is if our definition can be refuted by 1 Corinthians 13, or anywhere else in Scripture for that matter. I do not want anyone to think they have passed out of death into life because they force themselves to joylessly, bitterly, even spitefully "sacrifice" for another, (it is possible, have you never done it?) simply because they think that kind of "love" to guarantee their entrance into heaven!
Accurate, helpful definitions of love
In "Mere Christianity", C.S. Lewis gives a definition of love that I really like. Another definition that stems from the theology of John Piper is probably my favorite. I think it is useful to keep both of these definitions in mind because I think they lend themselves to application more easily in different circumstances. The definitions from Lewis and Piper1 are, respectively:
I) Desiring the good of another
II) Delighting in the delight of another
Desiring the good of another as the definition of love
Lewis says, "That is what is meant in the Bible by loving him: wishing his good..." This simple definition of love could change your life, if you read it in the context given below. I think it is worth quoting Lewis at length:
"...we might try to understand exactly what loving your neighbor as yourself means. I have to love him as I love myself. Well, how exactly do I love myself?Now that I come to think of it, I have not exactly got a feeling of fondness or affection for myself, and I do not even always enjoy my own society. So apparently 'Love your neighbor' does not mean 'feel fond of him' or 'find him attractive'. I ought to have seen that before, because, of course, you cannot feel fond of a person by trying. Do I think well of myself, think myself a nice chap? Well, I am afraid I sometimes do (and those are, no doubt, my worst moments) but that is not why I love myself. In fact it is the other way round: my self-love makes me think myself nice, but thinking myself nice is not why I love myself. So loving my enemies does not apparently mean thinking them nice either. That is an enormous relief. For a good many people imagine that forgiving your enemies means making out that they are really not such bad fellows after all, when it is quite plain that they are. Go a step further. In my most clear-sighted moments not only do I not think myself a nice man, but I know that I am a very nasty one. I can look at some of the things I have done with horror and loathing. So apparently I am allowed to loathe and hate some of the things my enemies do. Now that I come to think of it, I remember Christian teachers telling me long ago that I must hate bad man's actions, but not hate the bad man: or, as they would say, hate the sin but not the sinner... I admit that this means loving people who have nothing lovable about them. But then, has oneself anything lovable about it? You love it simply because it is yourself, God intends us to love all selves in the same way and for the same reason: but He has given us the sum ready worked out on our own case to show us how it works. We have then to go on and apply the rule to all the other selves."
A few comments:
1) This whole discourse arose from Lewis' mediation on Matthew 22:39 "You shall love your neighbor as yourself." I think this definition is both accurate and helpful in the regards how we are to love other people. Try thinking this way. "God intends us to love all selves... but He has given us the sum ready worked out on our own case to show us how it works."
2) This "wishing his good..." is implied to be a wishing that is coupled with action, not just sentimental feeling. If you had the opportunity to do someone good, and did not take the opportunity, you would not be truly wishing their good. The "wishing" or "desiring" is, however, critical to genuine love; the heart attitude is what makes sacrifice, or any other external action, an action of love.
3) The definition that Lewis gives does not put the non-Biblical restriction of sacrifice as a requirement for love. The love that Lewis describes is a love that is willing to sacrifice, but if one's desires are in accordance with the good of the one who is loved, then the act of loving them is not a sacrifice of one's own desires, but rather is in accordance with them.
4) I think putting sacrifice at the definition level of love is due to the idea that "love is an action, not a feeling" mentality. But I think that we have swayed too far in the opposite direction, and tried to get the action without the feeling, that is why the concept of sacrifice is so prevalent. Lewis' solution is, I think, much better:
But though natural likings should normally be encouraged, it would bePlacing sacrifice at the definition level of love puts constraints on Christian love that the Bible does not place on it. This is one reason why I think Lewis' definition is both helpful and accurate.
quite wrong to think that the way to become charitable is to sit trying to
manufacture affectionate feelings...The rule for all of us is perfectly simple. Do not waste time bothering whether you "love" your neighbour; act as if you did. As soon as we do this we find one of the great secrets. When you are behaving as if you loved someone, you will presently come to love him. If you injure someone you dislike, you will find yourself disliking him more. If you do him a good turn, you will find yourself disliking him less.
It may seem that I have been bashing the concept of "sacrifice" in general. Next time I will go into the second definition of love that I gave, and with that discuss the role of sacrifice and what it means, and does not mean, in the context of love.
1 Although this is not a direct quote from John Piper, I feel confident that it is in harmony with his theology, as I will discuss in the next post.
Saturday, June 5, 2010
Peter's train of thought (Part 2)
...applying all diligence, in your faith supply moral excellence, and in your moral excellence, knowledge, 6and in your knowledge, self-control, and in your self-control, perseverance, and in your perseverance, godliness, 7and in your godliness, brotherly kindness, and in your brotherly kindness, love. 8For if these qualities are yours and are increasing, they render you neither useless nor unfruitful in the true knowledge of our Lord Jesus Christ. 2 Peter 1:5-8 (NASB)
Before I move further in this list, I want to make two points that deal with the last post:
1) Moral excellence versus self-control
In my last post, I did not do a good job of distinguishing between moral excellence and self-control. They are similar, but definitely have distinct meanings. The meaning of moral excellence is pretty intuitive. It could be said as, "moral superiority." I think this word is primarily used in the outward sense. The morally excellent person is such that their conduct is superior to those around them.
Two major possible downfalls for the morally excellent person are pride and license. If we are more moral than the immoral around us, then we may consider our standard to be very high, when in terms of absolute standards, they might in fact be quite low. So we continue in our puddle of sin, and think we are morally excellent, simply because people around us are swimming in a lake if sin. We are proud of our superior, yet licentious state. I think this is why Peter makes sure that we supply our moral excellence with knowledge. We must have knowledge of the standard of moral excellence compared to God, not compared to those around us. For "God opposes the proud" (James 4:6), and "Strive ... for the holiness without which no one will see the Lord." Knowledge of what our standard of moral excellence should be guards us from pride and from license.
The self-controlled person has a form of mastery over their sinful nature. The difference between these moral excellence and self-control is that moral excellence is more a comparative standard, and self-control is more of an absolute standard. With moral excellence, even if it is the light of Scripture, I think our tendency is to look around and compare ourselves with others. Self-control looks inward and seeks to eradicate the sinful nature, independent of how holy or immoral the people around us are.
A possible snare of self-control is despair. Even people who have been faithfully cultivating self-control still have a sinful nature, and they will stumble. That is why I think Peter says for our self-control to have perseverance, which is a guard against despair.
2) A pattern in addition to the sequence....
We have seen that there is a certain kind of faith that Peter wants the readers to have. At this point, what we have seen is a faith that has moral excellence, moral excellence which is in accordance with knowledge, knowledge that is governed by self-control, and self-control that is patiently persevering through trails of various kinds, eagerly waiting for the return of Christ, and thereby for freedom from sin. This is the sequence, but I think there is also a pattern.
There were a couple of reasons why I wrote the previous section about moral excellence and self-control. One was to show that Peter is not using redundant terms; each word used in this list is purposeful and specific. The other was to help us see a pattern in what he is writing. I think that this will help us see even more clearly the logical sequence of these verses:
i) Moral excellence: outward, interpersonal, failure tends toward pride and/or license
ii) Knowledge: [well-rounded Biblical knowledge] guards against pride and license
iii) Self-control: inward, failure tends toward despair or depression
iv) Perseverance: [patiently persevering until Christ's return] guards against despair
It is important to see that our mortification of sin, our self-control, is even more important and more central than our morality. "Out of the abundance of the heart, the mouth speaks." (Matthew 12:34) Self-control results in outward morality, but the reverse is not necessarily true.
Reverting to my closing question from the last post, is this "Faith... supplied with self-control" now enough? Peter is asking us to see what kind of faith we have, and he is probing deeper and deeper into our souls. The answer is no, it is not enough.
Moving on to perseverance... supplied with godliness
The Greek word translated "godliness" in this verse is eusebeia. The simple definition is "piety; holiness." However, there is an interesting implication with this word that leads Strong's Concordance to add to the definition: "piety; specially, the gospel scheme:"1 and another source: " Eusebeia relates to real, true, vital, and spiritual relation with God."2 I tried to find where these ideas came from.
The word eusebeia appears more in the book of 1 Timothy than in the rest of the NT combined, so I thought that would be a good place to learn about what it means. An interesting thing about the word "godliness" is that twice Paul uses it in connection with setting the mind on heavenly, rather than earthly things:
"train yourself for godliness; 8for while bodily training is of some value, godliness is of value in every way, as it holds promise for the present life and also for the life to come." (1 Tim. 4:7-8)
"quarrels about words... produce... constant friction among people who are depraved in mind and deprived of the truth, imagining that godliness is a means of gain. 6Now there is great gain in godliness with contentment, 7for we brought nothing into the world, and we cannot take anything out of the world." (1 Tim. 6:4a, 5-7)
The connection between godliness becomes a little clearer with these verses. Perseverance is the steadfastness that comes from waiting for our coming union with Christ, and godliness is the present manifestation of that hope.
Another thing I found was that the word "godliness" is often connected with the Gospel. This is clearest in 1 Timothy 3:16:
As moving from moral excellence to self-control brought us from external to internal action, so moving from self-control to godliness moves from internal action to internal orientation.
Our moral excellence, knowledge, self-control, and perseverance, are all to be oriented around (i.e. founded on) the Gospel, in which we receive the power for holiness. We must have self-control, etc. founded on Christ's blood shed to be the propitiation for our sin (1 John 4:10). We must have them founded on the fact that Christ is the vine, and we are the branches (John 15). We must have them founded on the fact Spirit is the one who enables us to do these things (Romans 8:13). Total dependence on Christ's righteousness, and on the Spirit's sanctifying work in our lives is the orientation and foundation out of which all hope for holiness comes.
Godliness... supplied with brotherly kindness
(The Greek word for "brotherly kindness" here is philadelphia, which really means "brotherly love," but since "love" (agape) is the next item on the list, it would be confusing in English to say "supply brotherly love with love..." )
A possible point of error, even in having faith... supplied with godliness, is the tendency to try to grow in personal godliness without sharing in the lives of others. The Bible is clear that our growth in godliness is to be pursued both individually and corporately. "...not forsaking our own assembling together, as is the habit of some, but encouraging one another; and all the more as you see the day drawing near." (Heb. 10:25) Hear how important the unity of the body of Christ is:
19So then you are no longer strangers and aliens, but you are fellow citizens with the saints, and are of God's household, 20having been built on the foundation of the apostles and prophets, Christ Jesus Himself being the corner stone, 21in whom the whole building, being fitted together, is growing into a holy temple in the Lord, 22in whom you also are being built together into a dwelling of God in the Spirit. (Eph. 2:19-22)
and again,
15but speaking the truth in love, we are to grow up in all aspects into Him who is the head, even Christ, 16from whom the whole body, being fitted and held together by what every joint supplies, according to the proper working of each individual part, causes the growth of the body for the building up of itself in love. (Eph. 4:15-16)
Let us not forget that our pursuit of godliness is to be done in such a way that the whole body of Christ is built up.
Brotherly kindness... supplied with love
Even philadelphia has its limitations in verifying our faith. There is a stronger word for love in the Greek, a word that appears in no other literature than the New Testament. At the core of this list is love (agape). Let's look back again at the list that Peter gives, only this time, let's see the result of supplying our faith with these things:
...applying all diligence, in your faith supply moral excellence, and in your moral excellence, knowledge, 6and in your knowledge, self-control, and in your self-control, perseverance, and in your perseverance, godliness, 7and in your godliness, brotherly kindness, and in your brotherly kindness, love. 8For if these qualities are yours and are increasing, they render you neither useless nor unfruitful in the true knowledge of our Lord Jesus Christ. 2 Peter 1:5-8(NASB)
Jesus said that " 1I am the true vine, and My Father is the vinedresser. 2"Every branch in Me that does not bear fruit, He takes away... he who abides in Me and I in him, he bears much fruit... If anyone does not abide in Me, he is thrown away as a branch and dries up" (John 15)
What I think Peter is saying in verse 9 is that if we have these qualities, and they are increasing, we can be assured that we will bear fruit, that we are in Christ, and that our faith is indeed real. So Peter is saying that faith... supplied with love (agape) is a sure confirmation of the genuineness of our faith. This is said in other places in Scripture, both in reference to love for God and love for others.
1) Love for God: "2By this we know that we love the children of God, when we love God and observe His commandments." (1 John 5:2)
2) Love for others: "By this all men will know that you are My disciples, if you have love for one another." (John 13:35), and "We know that we have passed out of death into life, because we love the brethren. He who does not love abides in death." (1 John 3:14)
From this passage, we can see that if we have "faith acting through love" (Gal 5:6), and if it is increasing, we can be assured that we know God. Let us not forget the moral excellence, knowledge, self-control, perseverance, godliness, and brotherly kindness; but though all the components of this list are important for the Christian to neither be useless nor unfruitful, in the end, the Spirit testifying through our hearts and our lives that we have love for God and for others is the surest way to know that our faith is genuine.
If this love is so important, I think it would be wise to spend some time considering what agape or "Christian love" is, and what it is not. This will be the topic for my next post!
1 http://www.eliyah.com/cgi-bin/strongs.cgi?file=greeklexicon&isindex=2150
2 Greattreasures.org
Before I move further in this list, I want to make two points that deal with the last post:
1) Moral excellence versus self-control
In my last post, I did not do a good job of distinguishing between moral excellence and self-control. They are similar, but definitely have distinct meanings. The meaning of moral excellence is pretty intuitive. It could be said as, "moral superiority." I think this word is primarily used in the outward sense. The morally excellent person is such that their conduct is superior to those around them.
Two major possible downfalls for the morally excellent person are pride and license. If we are more moral than the immoral around us, then we may consider our standard to be very high, when in terms of absolute standards, they might in fact be quite low. So we continue in our puddle of sin, and think we are morally excellent, simply because people around us are swimming in a lake if sin. We are proud of our superior, yet licentious state. I think this is why Peter makes sure that we supply our moral excellence with knowledge. We must have knowledge of the standard of moral excellence compared to God, not compared to those around us. For "God opposes the proud" (James 4:6), and "Strive ... for the holiness without which no one will see the Lord." Knowledge of what our standard of moral excellence should be guards us from pride and from license.
The self-controlled person has a form of mastery over their sinful nature. The difference between these moral excellence and self-control is that moral excellence is more a comparative standard, and self-control is more of an absolute standard. With moral excellence, even if it is the light of Scripture, I think our tendency is to look around and compare ourselves with others. Self-control looks inward and seeks to eradicate the sinful nature, independent of how holy or immoral the people around us are.
A possible snare of self-control is despair. Even people who have been faithfully cultivating self-control still have a sinful nature, and they will stumble. That is why I think Peter says for our self-control to have perseverance, which is a guard against despair.
2) A pattern in addition to the sequence....
We have seen that there is a certain kind of faith that Peter wants the readers to have. At this point, what we have seen is a faith that has moral excellence, moral excellence which is in accordance with knowledge, knowledge that is governed by self-control, and self-control that is patiently persevering through trails of various kinds, eagerly waiting for the return of Christ, and thereby for freedom from sin. This is the sequence, but I think there is also a pattern.
There were a couple of reasons why I wrote the previous section about moral excellence and self-control. One was to show that Peter is not using redundant terms; each word used in this list is purposeful and specific. The other was to help us see a pattern in what he is writing. I think that this will help us see even more clearly the logical sequence of these verses:
i) Moral excellence: outward, interpersonal, failure tends toward pride and/or license
ii) Knowledge: [well-rounded Biblical knowledge] guards against pride and license
iii) Self-control: inward, failure tends toward despair or depression
iv) Perseverance: [patiently persevering until Christ's return] guards against despair
It is important to see that our mortification of sin, our self-control, is even more important and more central than our morality. "Out of the abundance of the heart, the mouth speaks." (Matthew 12:34) Self-control results in outward morality, but the reverse is not necessarily true.
Reverting to my closing question from the last post, is this "Faith... supplied with self-control" now enough? Peter is asking us to see what kind of faith we have, and he is probing deeper and deeper into our souls. The answer is no, it is not enough.
Moving on to perseverance... supplied with godliness
The Greek word translated "godliness" in this verse is eusebeia. The simple definition is "piety; holiness." However, there is an interesting implication with this word that leads Strong's Concordance to add to the definition: "piety; specially, the gospel scheme:"1 and another source: " Eusebeia relates to real, true, vital, and spiritual relation with God."2 I tried to find where these ideas came from.
The word eusebeia appears more in the book of 1 Timothy than in the rest of the NT combined, so I thought that would be a good place to learn about what it means. An interesting thing about the word "godliness" is that twice Paul uses it in connection with setting the mind on heavenly, rather than earthly things:
"train yourself for godliness; 8for while bodily training is of some value, godliness is of value in every way, as it holds promise for the present life and also for the life to come." (1 Tim. 4:7-8)
"quarrels about words... produce... constant friction among people who are depraved in mind and deprived of the truth, imagining that godliness is a means of gain. 6Now there is great gain in godliness with contentment, 7for we brought nothing into the world, and we cannot take anything out of the world." (1 Tim. 6:4a, 5-7)
The connection between godliness becomes a little clearer with these verses. Perseverance is the steadfastness that comes from waiting for our coming union with Christ, and godliness is the present manifestation of that hope.
Another thing I found was that the word "godliness" is often connected with the Gospel. This is clearest in 1 Timothy 3:16:
16Great indeed, we confess, is the mystery [something before unknown, but now revealed] of godliness [eusebeia]:1 Timothy 3:16 shows us that Biblical godliness is a Gospel-oriented godliness.
He was manifested in the flesh,
vindicated by the Spirit,
seen by angels,
proclaimed among the nations,
believed on in the world,
taken up in glory.
As moving from moral excellence to self-control brought us from external to internal action, so moving from self-control to godliness moves from internal action to internal orientation.
Our moral excellence, knowledge, self-control, and perseverance, are all to be oriented around (i.e. founded on) the Gospel, in which we receive the power for holiness. We must have self-control, etc. founded on Christ's blood shed to be the propitiation for our sin (1 John 4:10). We must have them founded on the fact that Christ is the vine, and we are the branches (John 15). We must have them founded on the fact Spirit is the one who enables us to do these things (Romans 8:13). Total dependence on Christ's righteousness, and on the Spirit's sanctifying work in our lives is the orientation and foundation out of which all hope for holiness comes.
Godliness... supplied with brotherly kindness
(The Greek word for "brotherly kindness" here is philadelphia, which really means "brotherly love," but since "love" (agape) is the next item on the list, it would be confusing in English to say "supply brotherly love with love..." )
A possible point of error, even in having faith... supplied with godliness, is the tendency to try to grow in personal godliness without sharing in the lives of others. The Bible is clear that our growth in godliness is to be pursued both individually and corporately. "...not forsaking our own assembling together, as is the habit of some, but encouraging one another; and all the more as you see the day drawing near." (Heb. 10:25) Hear how important the unity of the body of Christ is:
19So then you are no longer strangers and aliens, but you are fellow citizens with the saints, and are of God's household, 20having been built on the foundation of the apostles and prophets, Christ Jesus Himself being the corner stone, 21in whom the whole building, being fitted together, is growing into a holy temple in the Lord, 22in whom you also are being built together into a dwelling of God in the Spirit. (Eph. 2:19-22)
and again,
15but speaking the truth in love, we are to grow up in all aspects into Him who is the head, even Christ, 16from whom the whole body, being fitted and held together by what every joint supplies, according to the proper working of each individual part, causes the growth of the body for the building up of itself in love. (Eph. 4:15-16)
Let us not forget that our pursuit of godliness is to be done in such a way that the whole body of Christ is built up.
Brotherly kindness... supplied with love
Even philadelphia has its limitations in verifying our faith. There is a stronger word for love in the Greek, a word that appears in no other literature than the New Testament. At the core of this list is love (agape). Let's look back again at the list that Peter gives, only this time, let's see the result of supplying our faith with these things:
...applying all diligence, in your faith supply moral excellence, and in your moral excellence, knowledge, 6and in your knowledge, self-control, and in your self-control, perseverance, and in your perseverance, godliness, 7and in your godliness, brotherly kindness, and in your brotherly kindness, love. 8For if these qualities are yours and are increasing, they render you neither useless nor unfruitful in the true knowledge of our Lord Jesus Christ. 2 Peter 1:5-8(NASB)
Jesus said that " 1I am the true vine, and My Father is the vinedresser. 2"Every branch in Me that does not bear fruit, He takes away... he who abides in Me and I in him, he bears much fruit... If anyone does not abide in Me, he is thrown away as a branch and dries up" (John 15)
What I think Peter is saying in verse 9 is that if we have these qualities, and they are increasing, we can be assured that we will bear fruit, that we are in Christ, and that our faith is indeed real. So Peter is saying that faith... supplied with love (agape) is a sure confirmation of the genuineness of our faith. This is said in other places in Scripture, both in reference to love for God and love for others.
1) Love for God: "2By this we know that we love the children of God, when we love God and observe His commandments." (1 John 5:2)
2) Love for others: "By this all men will know that you are My disciples, if you have love for one another." (John 13:35), and "We know that we have passed out of death into life, because we love the brethren. He who does not love abides in death." (1 John 3:14)
From this passage, we can see that if we have "faith acting through love" (Gal 5:6), and if it is increasing, we can be assured that we know God. Let us not forget the moral excellence, knowledge, self-control, perseverance, godliness, and brotherly kindness; but though all the components of this list are important for the Christian to neither be useless nor unfruitful, in the end, the Spirit testifying through our hearts and our lives that we have love for God and for others is the surest way to know that our faith is genuine.
If this love is so important, I think it would be wise to spend some time considering what agape or "Christian love" is, and what it is not. This will be the topic for my next post!
1 http://www.eliyah.com/cgi-bin/strongs.cgi?file=greeklexicon&isindex=2150
2 Greattreasures.org
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)