• Welcome to Talk Jesus

    A true bible based, Jesus centered online community. Join over 13,000 members today

    Register Log In

About Love

Users who viewed this discussion (Total:6)

Active
you said Christ doesn't dispense his servants for the worlds benefit are we not to be
kind to who soever also whether they be folk of the world the lost or the
congregation
The epistles of 1&2 Timothy and Titus are sometimes referred to as pastoral
epistles because so much of the information therein pertains to ministerial conduct,
attitude, duty, and responsibility.

I would say that 2Tim 2:24b-26 is especially applicable to teachers. I can testify,
from years of personal experience, that many of the people attending Sunday
school classes are difficult students; not easy to reach.
_
 
Active
The epistles of 1&2 Timothy and Titus are sometimes referred to as pastoral
epistles because so much of the information therein pertains to ministerial conduct,
attitude, duty, and responsibility.

I would say that 2Tim 2:24b-26 is especially applicable to teachers. I can testify,
from years of personal experience, that many of the people attending Sunday
school classes are difficult students; not easy to reach.
_
Thankyou beetow
i just wanted to ask and i glady recieve your words x
 
Active
Titus 2:2 . . Older men are to be temperate, dignified, sensible, sound in faith, in love, in perseverance.

The koiné Greek word for "older men" is presbutes (pres-boo'-tace) which means: an old man. Presbutes is different than presbuteros, which refers to church officers; e.g. deacons (1Tim 5:17).

I used to get my watches serviced by an aging repairman at a local mall until the day finally came when I could no longer tolerate his manners. He was around seventy-five years old, cantankerous as can be, and perpetually cross. I often felt like asking him if he ever gave any thought to his future. You know, heaven is a place of peace. A hateful man like that repairman would not only never fit in there, but it wouldn't be fair to the others to permit him in their world.

"Cantankerous" can be defined as: habitually ill-humored, irritable, disagreeable, bearish, cankered, cranky, cross-grained, dour, morose, sour; crabby, cross, crusty, huffy, petulant, prickly, snappish; dyspeptic, ill-conditioned, thin-skinned, complaining, and ill-natured.

A Christian man in old age really ought to be a sweet, mellow guy: a pal and a big brother for the younger ones rather than somebody they'd prefer do the world a favor by stepping in front of a bus.
_
 
Active
Titus 2:3-5 . . The aged women likewise, that they be in behavior as becomes
holiness: not traducers, not given to much wine, teachers of right; that they may
train the young women to be sensible, to love their husbands, to love their children,
to be discreet, chaste, keepers at home, good, and subordinate to their own
husbands; that the word of God not be dishonored.

Traducers are particularly ugly human beings; especially the kind that misrepresent
their own friends and say things about them that their friends would never
approve; thus needlessly disparaging their friends' reputations save for the pure
pleasure of having something to say about somebody.

Traducers aren't regular gossips, no, they're malicious gossips. Webster's defines
malice as: a deep-seated, often unexplainable desire to see another suffer. In other
words, traducers like to hurt people for no reason other than that it's gratifying.
We could hardly characterize malicious gossips as either good or discreet.

Too many women in America have been trained for marriage by militant feminism.
Far from teaching younger women to respect their husbands, feminism teaches the
younger women to stand up to their husbands; and rather than be keepers at
home, feminism has them out seeking means to compete with men and break the
so-called glass ceiling; and rather than love their children, feminism has them
dominating their offspring in a home-life society structured on divisions of labor,
command and control, tyranny, and regimentation. Those behaviors certainly can
never be categorized as honoring the word of God.
_
 
Active
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 common courtesy along with
keeping a civil tongue in one's head.
_
 
Active
Titus 3:10-11 . . A man that is an heretic after the first and second admonition
reject; knowing that he that is such is subverted, and sinneth, being condemned of
himself.

The Greek word for "heretic" is hairetikos (hahee-ret-ee-kos') which means: a
schismatic; which is someone in your very own church who causes dissent,
rebellion, division, discord, and disharmony.

Webster's defines an heretic as: 1) a dissenter from established church dogma;
especially one who disavows a revealed truth, and 2) one who dissents from an
accepted belief or doctrine; viz: a nonconformist.

I'm a former Catholics turned Protestant. However, I don't fit the definition of a
heretic. I'm what's known in Christian circles as an apostate; viz: defector; which
Webster's defines as people who forsakes one's cause, party, or nation for another
often because of a change in ideology.

Heretics don't usually defect; but remain inside to foster insurrection: to undermine
hierarchy, to bring about reform, to weaken unity, and to cause division. Every church
has its fair share of heretics and they can be very disruptive in a Sunday school
class.

The Greek word for "reject" is paraiteomai (par-ahee-teh'-om-ahee) which means:
to beg off; viz: deprecate, decline, and shun. In other words, don't give heretics the
time of day, i.e. don't engage them in discussions related to resisting your church's
leadership, its management practices, and/or its curriculum.

Some religions, e.g. Jehovah's Witnesses, practice total shunning; viz: not only in
church, but outside too; even in homes and families. That's pretty extreme and I
really don't think Paul means we should go that far with it; instead limit our shunning
to matters related to church life rather than regular life.
_
 
Active
Heb 10:24 . . And 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.
_
 
Active
Heb 12:14a . . Pursue peace with all men,

The Geek 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.

"Blessed are the peacemakers: for they shall be called the children of God." (Matt 5:9)
_
 
Active
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,
deference, and consideration. 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: one's 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 in any way at all.

"Behold, what manner of love the Father hath bestowed upon us, that we should be
called the sons of God" (1John 3:1)

The manner of love that a normal father feels for his own children is far more
sensitive, than the love he might feel for his neighbor's children. A normal father's
love for his own children is down in his gut, viz: his affections.

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 and He'd really like for the world to give Him
reason to improve His opinion.
_
 
Active
Heb 13:2 . . Do not neglect to be hospitable with strangers; for by this some have
entertained angels without knowing it.

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)

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 selected by God for a special purpose.
_
 
Active
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.

"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." (Eph 5:30-32)

"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" (1Cor 12:12-13)

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; other countries, not so much.
_
 
Active
Heb 13:4 . . Let marriages be respected: and the bed kept unsoiled; for God will
judge the adulterer and all the sexually immoral.

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; for example:

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

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.

"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." (Gen 3:6)

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.

"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."
(1Cor 7:4)

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!
_
 
Active
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.

"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?" (Jas 2:2-4)

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 at
church avoided me without my knowing it because my appearance and my vehicle
offended their sensibilities.
_
 
Active
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.

"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?" (Jas 2:2-4)

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 at
church avoided me without my knowing it because my appearance and my vehicle
offended their sensibilities.
_
Love your post and ive just read james chapter 2 and its so right not to play favorites based on anything
i also am a bargain hunter also love them charity shops ive had so many good buys and my car is 16 years old and still going Praise God
i once went to a business course and the teacher was explaining tax and was talking about what you could count as a business cost and he said if you use your car this would be a cost so he picked my car as an example
the worst car in tje car park lol
as they all had top notch motors

i was so oh Dear he wants know how much it worth well i wasnt bothered really made me laugh

really loved your post as i do all of them you faithfully write
God bless you Beetow x
 
Active
Nicola Jane; hello!

You know what's interesting? This project started out initially as just a way to pass
the time, i.e. a hobby. I didn't expect it would benefit someone other than myself.

Well; we're drawing near to the end. I'm going to miss all your kind words of
encouragement.
_
 
Active
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 per 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-- i.e. the liberator's law (Rom
8:2) --judges Christians by their treatment of other people in accord with how
Christ wants them to be treated in his name.

There are Christians out there who are so uncivil, so uncompromising, so
implacable so militant, so irritable, 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.
_
 
Active
Nicola Jane; hello!

You know what's interesting? This project started out initially as just a way to pass
the time, i.e. a hobby. I didn't expect it would benefit someone other than myself.

Well; we're drawing near to the end. I'm going to miss all your kind words of
encouragement.
_
well beetow you keep posting because its a good hobbie to have

to me it means more than a hobbie
its encouraging and helpfull in many ways

as some of your posts are deffo a word for today for me many times over

so Beetow keep on with the good work and the Blessed word to us x

God bless your faithfullness x
 
Active
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.
_
 
Active
Jas 4:11a . . Do not speak evil of one another, brethren.

The 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.

Words are weapons,
Sharper than knives.
(The Devil Inside, INXS, Andrew Farriss and Michael Hutchence)
_
 
Active
Jas 4:11b-12 . . He who speaks evil of a brother and judges his brother, speaks
evil of the law and judges the law. But if you judge the law, you are not a doer of
the law but a judge. There is one Lawgiver, who is able to save and to destroy. Who
are you to judge another?

Someone is sure to jump to the conclusion that James is referring to Matt 7:1-5 but
this has nothing to do with that. What we’re talking about here is a kangaroo court
which Webster’s defines as: (1) a mock court in which the principles of law and
justice are disregarded or perverted, (2) a court characterized by irresponsible,
unauthorized, or irregular status or procedures, and (3) judgment or punishment
given outside of legal procedure.

One way to speak evil of the law, and judge the law, is to misrepresent the law by
construing it to mean things it doesn't say in writing; in other words: to overrule it
and/or criticize the law as out of date.

When a group of beer buddies, and/or a coffee clutch of girl friends, get together
and rake somebody over the coals behind their back, those buddies and girl friends
are conducting a kangaroo court in which the evidence presented is typically hear
say, feelings, thoughts, and impressions. I believe the common colloquialism for
that activity is "character assassination."

Typically the accused is never informed of the trial, nor given an opportunity to
confront their accusers, nor are they granted the right to an appeal. Sadly, yet all
to commonly, once kangaroo courts reach a consensus, the condemned person’s
reputation among those kinds of “judges” is ruined forever with no chance of repair.
_
 
Top