Category Archives: Love

Love and Nothing

17 Thursday Mar 2022

Posted by in 1 Corinthians, Love

≈ 1 Comment

Tags

, ,

In 1 Corinthians 13, Paul begins his discourse on love with a reference to a series of wonderous actions. But each of these marvels, Paul says the action counts for nothing if it is not done in love:

If I speak in the tongues of men and of angels, but have not love, I am a noisy gong or a clanging cymbal. 2 And if I have prophetic powers, and understand all mysteries and all knowledge, and if I have all faith, so as to remove mountains, but have not love, I am nothing. 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.

1 Corinthians 13:1–3. It is easy to take Paul’s language of “nothing” as a mere rhetorical flourish.

But this illustration by a once well-known preacher J.D. Jones provides a well-constructed illustration which makes plain the substance of the Apostle’s argument. This illustration works first by referencing a commonplace which is instantly comprehensible by audience (a “naught” is a zero). Second, the illustration maps back onto Paul’s argument of “nothing”. These things without love are actually nothing.

Jones uses the symbol of “nothing” to illustrate his point:

“Love” is no “adjunct” to the Apostle. It is no “minor interest.” It is not something that competes for place with work and politics and play. It is the thing that gives everything else value. It is the thing that confers upon everything else its worth. The gifts Paul mentions in these verses were not insignificant and commonplace gifts. They were the greatest and most coveted of gifts. And what he says of them all is that they are valueless without love. They are like a row of ciphers without a digit in front to give them value. Write down a row of noughts. Write down a dozen of them, and what do they amount to? Exactly nothing! And if you were to write a thousand of them they would be nothing still. But put a figure in front of those noughts and they at once become significant. They stand for something, they mean much. Put three noughts down and they amount to just nothing. Just a “I” in front of them and they mean a thousand. And it is like that with gifts and powers, says the Apostles. They count for nothing without love. Life itself is nothing without love. It is no mere “adjunct,” no mere “minor interest.” It is that which makes life significant and worth while; it is that which lends to every gift its worth.

J. D. Jones, The Greatest of These: Addresses on the Thirteenth Chapter of First Corinthians (London: Hodder and Stoughton Limited, 1925), 39–40.

The first reference to “love” in the Bible

16 Wednesday Mar 2022

Posted by in Genesis, Love

≈ 1 Comment

Tags

, , ,

(These are some initial observations on the various aspects of love which have their genesis in the story of the sacrifice of Isaac)

Genesis 22 contains one of the strangest stories in the Bible. God has called Abraham to the land of Canaan and has promised that the land will be left to Abraham’s “seed”. God makes plain that Abraham will have a son by Sarah and that this son will inherent. God then gives a perplexing commandment:

Genesis 22:1–6 (ESV)

22 After these things God tested Abraham and said to him, “Abraham!” And he said, “Here I am.” 2 He said, “Take your son, your only son Isaac, whom you love, and go to the land of Moriah, and offer him there as a burnt offering on one of the mountains of which I shall tell you.” 3 So Abraham rose early in the morning, saddled his donkey, and took two of his young men with him, and his son Isaac. And he cut the wood for the burnt offering and arose and went to the place of which God had told him. 4 On the third day Abraham lifted up his eyes and saw the place from afar. 5 Then Abraham said to his young men, “Stay here with the donkey; I and the boy will go over there and worship and come again to you.” 6 And Abraham took the wood of the burnt offering and laid it on Isaac his son. And he took in his hand the fire and the knife. So they went both of them together.

This passage is remarkable also for the fact that it is the first place in the Bible which mentions “love.” And the first love mentioned in the Bible is the love of a father for his son. This does not mean that there was not love between spouses or anything of the sort. But it is interesting in terms of the function of the Bible as a whole.

Caravaggio 1598

There is another strange thing: What is Abraham thinking: not merely the perplexity of killing one’s own son; but also the end of the promise of God which has controlled Abraham’s entire life. The book of Hebrews provides this insight into Abraham’s decision:

Hebrews 11:17–19 (ESV)

17 By faith Abraham, when he was tested, offered up Isaac, and he who had received the promises was in the act of offering up his only son, 18 of whom it was said, “Through Isaac shall your offspring be named.” 19 He considered that God was able even to raise him from the dead, from which, figuratively speaking, he did receive him back.

Abraham does take his son up the mountain only to have him rescued by a substitute:

Genesis 22:7–14 (ESV)

7 And Isaac said to his father Abraham, “My father!” And he said, “Here I am, my son.” He said, “Behold, the fire and the wood, but where is the lamb for a burnt offering?” 8 Abraham said, “God will provide for himself the lamb for a burnt offering, my son.” So they went both of them together.

9 When they came to the place of which God had told him, Abraham built the altar there and laid the wood in order and bound Isaac his son and laid him on the altar, on top of the wood. 10 Then Abraham reached out his hand and took the knife to slaughter his son. 11 But the angel of the Lord called to him from heaven and said, “Abraham, Abraham!” And he said, “Here I am.” 12 He said, “Do not lay your hand on the boy or do anything to him, for now I know that you fear God, seeing you have not withheld your son, your only son, from me.” 13 And Abraham lifted up his eyes and looked, and behold, behind him was a ram, caught in a thicket by his horns. And Abraham went and took the ram and offered it up as a burnt offering instead of his son. 14 So Abraham called the name of that place, “The Lord will provide”; as it is said to this day, “On the mount of the Lord it shall be provided.”

Thus, Isaac’s life is spared by God providing a substitute for the death to which God has sentenced Isaac.

This first reference to love thus brings together many different strands of love which will be developed over the course of the Bible to culminated in Christ.

First, there is the love of a Father for a Son. As Jesus says:

John 10:17

For this reason the Father loves me, because I lay down my life that I may take it up again.

The Father loves the Son – and also that love is in the context of the Son laying down his life.

Second, this love takes place in the context of a covenant, the covenant between God and Abraham. God is sworn to fulfill a promise to Abraham by means of this son. The concept of God’s love being expressed by covenant is a theme which will be developed at length in the rest of the Bible. For those who have heard some Hebrew, this is the matter of “hesed”, covenant or loyal love.

Third, there is the love of the substitute:

John 15:13

Greater love has no one than this, that someone lay down his life for his friends.

God shows love for us by providing the substitute to save us from death:

John 3:16

“For God so loved the world, that he gave his only Son, that whoever believes in him should not perish but have eternal life.

Fourth, this love foreshadows the resurrection which will make even the death of the substitute “right.”

Fifth, the love of the substitute for us, becomes the predicate of our love:

John 15:9

As the Father has loved me, so have I loved you. Abide in my love.

Sixth, that love which has for us, becomes the basis for another command:

John 15:17

These things I command you, so that you will love one another.

Hence,

John 14:15

“If you love me, you will keep my commandments.

What is a human being, if you extirpate love?

04 Friday Jun 2021

Posted by in Love, Psychology, Uncategorized

≈ Leave a comment

Tags

, , , , ,

In The Criminal Psychopath, Jurimetrics. 2011 Summer; 51: 355–397, Kiehl and Hoffman provide a thorough summary of the history, diagnosis, and treatment of the psychopath, particularly with a view to amount of crime committed by this relatively small proportion of the population.

It raises the interesting issue of the degree to which the condition is the result of a brain disorder and the interaction with this brain in its environment. There is apparently some evidence that the condition has a genetic component, and perhaps it is a peculiarly vulnerable brain in connection with the “right” environment which leads to the exhibition of utter moral inability. Plainly performing standard experiments by tormenting and mistreating children in rigorously similar manners to see whether the condition can be induced regularly would be evil. Therefore, one needs to consider proxies, such as the condition shows some responsiveness to treatment if the treatment early enough in life.

That there is correspondence between the condition and certain brain function is interesting: But note that the information cited shows the functioning of the brain: their brains function differently. When faced with moral situations the parts of their brain which were involved differed from “you and me.” But what does that exactly prove? The argument that the brain is causing this condition actually contains a hidden premise: that all thought must begin from the brain, not pass through the brain.

For a moment take a different body part: the psychopath and the mother with her child both use their hands, but the use is strikingly different. No one believes that the mother hand causes her sweet caress.

Reddit Turned an MIT AI Into a Psychopath. What Is It Doing to Your Brain? | Inc.com

Now a mother with broken hands could not caress in the same manner. The status of her hand both limits and permits certain behavior, but it does not cause her behavior.

But when it comes to the brain, it is easy to believe that the brain is causative. This is because the functioning of rest of the body relies heavily upon the functioning of the brain. In particular, the use of the brain in thought could imply that the brain is directing the thought.

But need that be so? If one adds as an element of the human being a mind, it is no difficulty to concluded that the minds of two different men would use their brains in a different manner: just as the psychopath murders and the doctor heals with the hand.

If we posit that information flows from the body toward the mind and the mind toward the body, effects can move in both directions. (The precise nature of mind and body is not the issue. Although at present I am very intrigued by Dembski’s Being as Communion (information is the ultimate base, not matter) and Thomas’ hylomorphism which seems to resolve Descartes’ hard cleavage interaction problem.) Thus certain types of brains would have effects without being the univocal cause.

Another element in the article which intrigued me was “His very disconnectedness is his mask. We cannot see him because we assume all humans have the connections that bind us, and because the psychopath’s very lack of those connections allows him to mimic them.” The psychopath, to use the Ancient Greek term, is a-storge: he lacks human connections. The fact of storge among other humans creates the framework which the psychopath exploits: “One explanation is that being exposed to the frailties of normal people in group therapeutic settings gives psychopaths a stock of information that makes them better at manipulating those normal people. As one psychopath put it, ‘These programs are like a finishing school. They teach you how to put the squeeze on people.'”

They bear a resemblance to Nietzsche’s Nobility who know themselves better than all others and are willing to command and exploit. They also exhibit the final end of depravity in Romans 1.

What should think of them. The authors were hopeful there were ways to get the psychopaths to slow down a bit on their crime spree of life. But there really wasn’t any element of hope.

“As one psychotherapist wrote, his psychopaths in treatment ‘have no desire to change, … have no concept of the future, resent all authorities (including therapists), view the patient role as … being in a position of inferiority, and deem therapy a joke and therapists as objects to be conned, threatened, seduced, or used.'”

That reference to the “future” stuck out. It is not merely that they have no concept of future punishment, they have no mechanism for hope. Perhaps they can move by hungers, I want this-then-that, but would be based upon a present hunger. I might plan to fulfill my hunger, but not be different.

Authorities obviously are merely impediments to be beaten or seduced. That is easy enough. But without the future, without hope. That again is a state described in Paul as the depth of lostness, “having no hope without God in the world.”

Now we come to this character: no authority, no hope, no future. Such a man is ultimately depraved.

It is the cognitive capacity of a man without love: because love is built around the future. Love does not exult in oneself, but puts another first. Love becomes a sort of authority for the other’s good becomes paramount.

Richard Sibbes, Sermon on Canticle 5.2(c)

12 Thursday Sep 2019

Posted by in Love, Puritan, Richard Sibbes, Song of Solomon, Uncategorized

≈ Leave a comment

Tags

, , ,

The next two observations on the text by Sibbes considers the persistence of the Christian life being grounded in the love of God. The first observation, which derives from the imagery of waking and sleeping, is that while the Christian may stumble, the Christian will never completely fall:

 Obs.1. ‘My heart waketh.’ God’s children never totally fall from grace.

First, he looks to an image in Isaiah 6:13:

Though they sleep, yet their heart is awake. The prophet Isaiah, speaking of the church and children of God, Isa. 6:13, saith, ‘It shall be as a tree, as an oak whose substance is in them, when they cast their leaves.’ Though you see neither fruit nor leaves, yet there is life in the root, ‘the seed remains in them.’

The imagery of Isaiah applies most directly to Israel as a whole. Sibbes notes the context, “speaking of the church and children of God” (here, “church” is being used to refer to the people of God prior to the New Covenant). Thus, he is not misusing the text exegetically but rather using the image as illustrative.

Sibbes next  applies the principle to an individual, Peter. (In making a reference the book of First Peter, I am surprised that Sibbes did not also reference 1 Peter. 1:23). Peter denied Jesus on the night of his arrest and trial, and Peter did not utterly fall away (as did Judas, who would not born of a “living hope”):

There is alway a seed remaining. It is an immortal seed that we are begotten by. Peter, when he denied his Master, was like an oak that was weather-beaten; yet there was life still in the root, 1 Pet. 1:3,Mat. 26:32, seq.For, questionless, Peter loved Christ from his heart. Sometimes a Christian may be in such a poor case, as the spiritual life runneth all to the heart, and the outward man is left destitute;

Sibbes then draws an analogy to a city ravaged in war:

as in wars, when the enemy hath conquered the field, the people run into the city, and if they be beaten out of the city, they run into the castle. The grace of God sometimes fails in the outward action, in the field, when yet it retireth to the heart, in which fort it is impregnable. ‘My heart waketh.’

Sibbes then applies the principle more directly to the issue, the outward failure and inward perseverance

When the outward man sleeps, and there are weak, dull performances, and perhaps actions amiss, too, yet notwithstanding ‘the heart waketh.’ As we see in a swoon or great scars, the blood, spirits, and life, though they leave the face and hands, &c., yet they are in the heart.

We have been wounded and appear dead, but our life has not yet left:

It is said in the Scripture of Eutychus, ‘His life is in him still,’ though he seemed to be dead, Acts 20:9. As Christ said of Lazarus, John 11:4, so a man may say of a Christian in his worst state, His life is in him still; he is not dead, but sleeps; ‘his heart waketh.’

This doctrine is contested. There are some who would say that one who falls has “lost his salvation”. There have been questions throughout the church among those who spoke of losing one’s salvation as to whether salvation could ever be regained; or even whether the regained salvation could merit heaven or only a purgatory. Sibbes anticipates that objection and contends this doctrine is consistent with Scripture:

 Obs.2. This is a sound doctrine and comfortable, agreeable to Scripture and the experience of God’s people. We must not lose it, therefore, but make use of it against the time of temptation. There are some pulses that discover life in the sickest man, so are there some breathings and spiritual motions of heart that will comfort in such times.

Those who speak of a lost salvation, put the continuance of salvation in human effort. Sibbes rightly places the provision and maintenance of salvation not in the human recipient but in the God who gives salvation:

These two never fail on God’s part, his love, which is unchangeable, and his grace, a fruit of his love; and two on our part, the impression of that love, and the gracious work of the new creature. ‘Christ never dies,’ saith the apostle, Heb. 7:25. As he never dies in himself, after his resurrection, so he never dies in his children. There is always spiritual life.

Sibbes then goes to the “use” of the doctrine. By the way, this insistent reference to the “use” of a doctrine was a hallmark of Puritan preaching. It demonstrates that the purpose of doctrine is not for some hypothetical future theology exam, but rather for living. This particular doctrine brings “comfort”. The doctrine provides a comfort because the our unfailing relationship with God is not based upon us but upon God: God engenders this love which provokes love in us; and love never fails:

This is a secret of God’s sanctuary, only belonging to God’s people. Others have nothing to do with it. They shall ever love God, and God will ever love them. The apostle, 1 Cor. 13:8, saith, ‘Love never fails.’ Gifts, you know, shall be abolished, because the manner of knowing we now use shall cease. ‘We see through a glass,’ &c., ‘but love abideth,’ 1 Cor. 13:12. Doth our love to God abide for ever, and doth not his love to us, whence it cometh? Ours is but a reflection of God’s love.

Edwards, Heaven is a World of Love

19 Tuesday Jul 2016

Posted by in Jonathan Edwards, Love, Uncategorized

≈ Leave a comment

Tags

, ,

Jonathan Edwards Heaven is a World of Love:

There, even in heaven, dwells the God from whom every stream of holy love, yea, every drop that is, or ever was, proceeds. There dwells God the Father, God the Son, and God the Spirit, united as one, in infinitely dear, and incomprehensible, and mutual, and eternal love. There dwells God the Father, who is the father of mercies, and so the father of love, who so loved the world as to give his only-begotten Son to die for it. There dwells Christ, the Lamb of God, the prince of peace and of love, who so loved the world that he shed his blood, and poured out his soul unto death for men. There dwells the great Mediator, through whom all the divine love is expressed toward men, and by whom the fruits of that love have been purchased, and through whom they are communicated, and through whom love is imparted to the hearts of all God’s people. There dwells Christ in both his natures, the human and the divine, sitting on the same throne with the Father. And there dwells the Holy Spirit — the Spirit of divine love, in whom the very essence of God, as it were, flows out, and is breathed forth in love, and by whose immediate influence all holy love is shed abroad in the hearts of all the saints on earth and in heaven. There, in heaven, this infinite fountain of love — this eternal Three in One — is set open without any obstacle to hinder access to it, as it flows forever. There this glorious God is manifested, and shines forth, in full glory, in beams of love. And there this glorious fountain forever flows forth in streams, yea, in rivers of love and delight, and these rivers swell, as it were, to an ocean of love, in which the souls of the ransomed may bathe with the sweetest enjoyment, and their hearts, as it were, be deluged with love! Again, I would consider heaven, with regard,

 

 

Born of Imperishable Seed

21 Thursday Jan 2016

Posted by in 1 Peter, Lectures, Love, Preaching, Sermons, Uncategorized

≈ Leave a comment

Tags

, , , , , , ,

17094542623_69a8bf28c3_o

1 Peter 1:22–25 (ESV)

22 Having purified your souls by your obedience to the truth for a sincere brotherly love, love one another earnestly from a pure heart, 23 since you have been born again, not of perishable seed but of imperishable, through the living and abiding word of God; 24 for

“All flesh is like grass

and all its glory like the flower of grass.

The grass withers,

and the flower falls,

25  but the word of the Lord remains forever.”

And this word is the good news that was preached to you.

Here is the issue: How does being born of imperishable seed, support the command to love one another?

 

How Hard it is to Love One Another

29 Thursday Oct 2015

Posted by in 1 Peter, Biblical Counseling, Love

≈ Leave a comment

Tags

, , , ,

14590650790_57546f517b_o

1 Peter 1:20–25 (ESV)

20 He was foreknown before the foundation of the world but was made manifest in the last times for the sake of you 21 who through him are believers in God, who raised him from the dead and gave him glory, so that your faith and hope are in God.

22 Having purified your souls by your obedience to the truth for a sincere brotherly love, love one another earnestly from a pure heart, 23 since you have been born again, not of perishable seed but of imperishable, through the living and abiding word of God; 24 for

“All flesh is like grass

and all its glory like the flower of grass.

The grass withers,

and the flower falls,

25  but the word of the Lord remains forever.”

And this word is the good news that was preached to you.

Love for One Another is Holiness

25 Friday Sep 2015

Posted by in 1 John, God the Father, Love

≈ Leave a comment

Tags

, , , , , ,

Holiness is not an abstract set of behaviors; it is love for God and love for one another. Holiness from the Father, who is the fountain of love:

1 John 3:16 (ESV)

16 By this we know love, that he laid down his life for us, and we ought to lay down our lives for the brothers.