"Love...is not self-seeking" 1 Cor. 13:5

[David Koot]

Quote:

---

Robert said:

Because ownership involves self-seeking!

---

This seems like a cross-over issue: religion and philosophy--and, perhaps, psychology. Ownership involves self-seeking? Not necessarily. At least, not in a negative or improper sense. There is a self-love that is appropriate. Jesus said that we should love our neighbor as we love ourselves. If we do not love ourselves, it might be difficult to love our neighbor. The whole concept of self-identity, of self-worth, seems to be involved here. Yes, we each have an identity, we have have self-worth, we each need to have a healthy self-concept, we each need to be proactive and in charge, to some extent at least, of our future. A person needs his own space, in which he has self-autonomy and control. Property ownership is a part of that. Even if it is only a room that someone rents, that room is his castle. As the celebrated Wilkes case held, in English common-law, although the cottage be the meanest in all England, the king himself cannot enter in, without the householders' consent. With a healthy self-concept and self-worth, we then are able to share, and give to others. Paul urges believers to work so that they will have something to share. Those in the early church are recorded as selling property and having things in common. Yet, the same verses tell us that they met daily, from house to house. So, some of them, at least, had homes. History does not indicate, to my awareness, that the early believers were homeless and destitute. Were we, today, to sell everything we have and give everything we have to others, then we ourselves would end up staying in shelters, or sleeping on the street, and applying for County assistance. We would be unable to live productive lives, and we would have nothing left to share with others. I don't think that would be loving our neighbor as we love ourselves. I do think it would be irresponsible and not productive of good.

David Koot

[Gerr]

If it is such a good news that you are teaching, why don't you proclaim your position to the whole world that believers can go on breaking everyone of God's laws and still go to heaven?

Gerry

[Robert]

Quote:

---

Clio said:

It's the only thing I can think of... Pray for him.

---

Very, Very, Very self-righteous attitude!

[Robert]

Quote:

---

David Koot said:

There is a self-love that is appropriate. Jesus said that we should love our neighbor as we love ourselves. If we do not love ourselves, it might be difficult to love our neighbor.

---

These words are from Satan the father of lies!

[Robert]

Quote:

---

David Koot said:

Those in the early church are recorded as selling property and having things in common. Yet, the same verses tell us that they met daily, from house to house. So, some of them, at least, had homes.

---

They had homes "in common".....There was no "self" as in "mine"! That comes from Satan the founder of "self"!

Quote:

---

History does not indicate, to my awareness, that the early believers were homeless and destitute.

---

No kidding....They were reflecting a life of selflessness among believers. The result? "There were no needy persons among them."

Why does the SDA church have poor? Because its believers ARE NOT reflecting the self-emptying love of God! And yet they claim to keep God's law....Funny!

Quote:

---

Were we, today, to sell everything we have and give everything we have to others, then we ourselves would end up staying in shelters, or sleeping on the street...

---

Like Jesus? Yes...but why? Because "we" live in a world dominated by "self"! In heaven there'll be no "self"...only outward ambition. We'll live for everyone but ourselves and everyone else will be doing the same. The result? Paradise!

Quote:

---

We would be unable to live productive lives, and we would have nothing left to share with others.

---

Who get the biggest benefit? YOU! Share what, what you have left over? That's still selfishness....

Quote:

---

I don't think that would be loving our neighbor as we love ourselves.

---

Yes it would....Christ didn't love Himself. He was willing to say goodbye to life forever so that His murders could take His place in heaven.

The opposite of self-love is not self-hate, it is selflessness. Self-hate is a by-product of self-love. People commit suicide because of their love of self.

[Robert]

Quote:

---

Robert said:

Self-hate is a by-product of self-love. People commit suicide because of their love of self.

---

• Thou shalt love the Lord Thy God with all thy heart and with all thy soul and with all thy mind. And the second is like unto it, Thou shalt love thy neighbor as thy self...

How many commandments? Two. The reason I’m emphasizing two is that there are some Christian psychologists who have taken this passage and made it into three commandments. They say 1. Love God. 2. To love your neighbour you must first love yourself. 3. Love your neighbour like yourself. Jesus did not say, “Upon these three commandments.” This idea of loving self is called “narcissism.” It comes from a young man from Greek mythology called Narcissus. He had low self-esteem and one day he was walking downcast along the path and he came across a pond. In those days they had no mirrors. He looked down and for the first time he saw himself and he realized that he was quite a handsome fellow. He fell in love with himself.

So these Christian psychologists say that we must first love ourselves before we can love our neighbours. No, Jesus did not say “You must love yourself in order that you may love your neighbours.” He said, “You must love your neighbour in the same way that you love yourself.”

Going back to our study on “agape” and “eros.” God placed into the heart of Adam agape love because Adam was created in God’s own image. “God is Agape” (1 John 4:8,16). That means that he had a love that went towards others and not towards himself because agape does not have self in it. 1 Cor. 13:5: “Agape seeketh not her own.” There is no self in agape. So this is Adam before his fall.

Now what happened when Adam sinned? If you read Steps to Christ, we are told that love disappeared and selfishness took its place. That is a correct description. Adam’s agape love became bent toward self. Therefore it became eros. That’s what happened at the fall. Human love was the agape bent toward self. In the Hebrew language this word of bending is called iniquity. The Hebrew word for iniquity means to be bent.

All we like sheep have gone astray. We have all bent to our own way.

Every human being is born with self-love. We don’t have to try to love ourselves. The day you do not love yourself you are a sick person. You would need to go to the hospital.

Even the person who commits suicide loves himself or herself. They can’t face the issues of life. They don’t care about how much it hurts their loved ones. They want to get rid of their problem and the only way is suicide. So self-love is spontaneous. Eros is a U-turn agape. How many of you have ever prayed, “Dear Jesus, please help me to love myself.” Have you ever prayed that? No.

Tell me, when you have been travelling on the highway and you broke the speed limit, and don’t tell me you haven’t. I haven’t had any ticket as yet but my last car was a diesel and it couldn’t break the speed limit, but now I have a Subaru and I’m always in danger of doing that. But let’s say you break the speed limit and a policeman stops you. You plead with him. You say, “Officer, I was in a hurry. I have an appointment.” Are you sorry because you love the policeman? Are you sorry because you love the law of the country or are you sorry because you love your pocket? Why are you pleading for mercy?

You love yourself also when you are bad. Am I correct? That is why when you preach the gospel to the world you have to show them. You have to come to them at the level they are. As the book Evangelism says, “You have to show them that there is a heaven to win and a hell to lose.” What are you appealing to? Their egocentric love. That’s all they have. When the young man came to Jesus and said, “What good thing must I do to be saved?” he had missed the gospel.

Jesus said, “Keep the commandments.”

He said, “I have been keeping it since I was in Primary Sabbath School.”

Jesus said, “Alright, let me test you. If you love your neighbour as yourself, then give your wealth to your neighbour and follow me and I will give you my wealth.”

Did he do it? No. Why? Because he loved himself. If you read further in the passage, you will come to Peter. He was a wonderful fellow. He spoke before he thought and he said, “Jesus, we have given up everything for you. What is our reward?” The great Peter! Jesus knew that he still had not been fully converted.

Jack Sequeria

[there buster]

Quote:

---

These words are from Satan the father of lies!

---

Actually, Robert, those are in fact the words of Jesus. Attributing the words of Jesus to Satan is flirting with blasphemy.

[there buster]

Quote:

---

In heaven there'll be no "self"...only outward ambition. We'll live for everyone but ourselves and everyone else will be doing the same. The result? Paradise!

---

As we have learned to anticipate, Robert's idea of Paradise differs from that of the Bible. Here is what Isaiah says, speaking on behalf of "the LORD"

Quote:

---

21 They will build houses and dwell in them;

they will plant vineyards and eat their fruit.

22 No longer will they build houses and others live in them,

or plant and others eat.

For as the days of a tree,

so will be the days of my people;

my chosen ones will long enjoy

the works of their hands.

---

Apparently, home ownership and vineyard ownership will exist in heaven.

No doubt, we shall soon hear "the word of the Robert" on why the Bible doesn't really mean what it says, it means what Robert says.

[Robert]

[Robert]

Quote:

---

Ed Dickerson said:

Quote:

---

These words are from Satan the father of lies!

---

Actually, Robert, those are in fact the words of Jesus. Attributing the words of Jesus to Satan is flirting with blasphemy.

---

They were Jesus' words only perverted....That is from Satan!

[Robert]

Quote:

---

Ed Dickerson said:

22 No longer will they build houses and others live in them....

---

Why, ownership? Not at all!

Then why?

Immortality! They will never die and another take residency.

Rob

[there buster]

Quote:

---

They were Jesus' words only perverted....That is from Satan!

---

Once again, we have only your declaration. Last time I looked, you hadn't been elected Pope.

Jesus says to love our neighbor "as" we love ourselves. By your lights, if we love our neighbor 'as" we love ourselves, then we should not only be destitute--the theme you keep harping on--then we should wish for our neighbor the same fate we choose for ourselves. That fate, again, according to "the word of Robert" is to be destitute.

I don't know a kind way of saying this. Robert, you seem to have delusions of grandeur. You arrogate to yourself the right to make judgments that belong to God alone. It's dangerous ground.

[there buster]

Quote:

---

Why, ownership? Not at all!

Then why?

Immortality! They will never die and another take residency.

---

Nifty. Every time you're demonstrated to be wrong, you shift your ground.

Whatever happened to "having everything in common?" They could shift residency just so "no one possesses anything," your oft repeated idea of Paradise. But, as demonstrated, that's not God's idea of Paradise, just yours.

Every point of your position has been destroyed, because

1) It's illogical

2) it's contrary to the actual record.

[Robert]

Quote:

---

David Koot said:

There is a self-love that is appropriate. Jesus said that we should love our neighbor as we love ourselves.

---

Again, that is a blatant lie! Jesus didn't give two commands:

1] Love self

and

2] Love your neighbor

No, He said:

A] Love your neighbor

AS

B] you love yourself.

The command is to stop loving "self" and love your neighbor.

If all of us could do this we would have a state of selflessness. Everyone's greatest ambition would be to live for everyone else. This is heaven in a nutshell!

But if you introduce one "nut" that loves himself [like Lucifer] heaven will become hell! That's why Lucifer couldn't stay in heaven....God wouldn't allow him to develop his system of self-love while in heaven.

Self-love sounds wonderful on paper, but when the rubber meets the road it is quite different....Look what it has done to this world.

Rob

[Robert]

Quote:

---

Ed Dickerson said:

Every point of your position has been destroyed, because

1) It's illogical

2) it's contrary to the actual record.

---

God's love is drastically different from selfish, human love.

Is 55:8 For my thoughts are not your thoughts, neither are your ways my ways, saith the LORD. 9 For as the heavens are higher than the earth, so are my ways higher than your ways, and my thoughts than your thoughts.

[there buster]

Quote:

---

1]

The command is to stop loving "self" and love your neighbor.

---

So why does it actually say "love your neighbor as you love yourself?"

Jesus just got mixed up?

IT's a logical mess, Robert.

If I "stop loving myself" and then love my neighbor in the same way, I'll stop loving my neighbor, too.

The way the text actually reads, your position makes no sense.

The words don't say what you want, so you change them.

But then, we could all do that, just change the words to fit our pet theories. Sorry, YOU don't have that authority.

Still, you could try to say it all again ONLY LOUDER.

Won't make any more sense, but it seems to be the way of it.

[Robert]

Quote:

---

Ed Dickerson said:

if we love our neighbor 'as" we love ourselves, then we should not only be destitute--the theme you keep harping on--then we should wish for our neighbor the same fate we choose for ourselves.

---

Jesus loved His neighbors with no thoughts to His human nature assumed at the incarnation. The result? Poverty!

Why? Again, if you live a selfless life in this world under Satan's principle of self, you will become destitute. This Jesus proved in keeping the law of God...especially its spirit.

Open your eyes man,

Rob

[Robert]

Quote:

---

Ed Dickerson said:

"love your neighbor as you love yourself?"

---

So there's two commands?

Does it read, "Love your neighbor and love yourself?" or does it say, "Love your neighbor AS yourself"?

Yes, the latter....In fact you can never really love your neighbor IF you love yourself.

I am really amazed with stupidity and self-righteousness that abounds here. The reason you fight this is because you don't want to be exposed as sinners falling short of God's selfless love. You are, as I have always stated, self-righteous legalists!

Rob

[there buster]

Quote:

---

Open your eyes man,

---

Thank you for not dissappointing me. Rather than making arrogant demands, you might try to reason a little more closely.

Quote:

---

if you live a selfless life in this world under Satan's principle of self, you will become destitute.

---

So you say. And if I love my neighbor as myself, I would wish that same selfless life upon him, which would lead to the same destitution.

If he's already destitute, maybe he's already become Christlike (by your definition). If I give him anything, it will only tempt him to keep it, and lose his salvation. That seems an evil thing to do.

You can't have it both ways, Robert. Your logic leads to an impossible end. And it leads you to making rude and arrogant demands.

Maybe you should try something else.

[Robert]

My Favorite Author, Jack:

"As He [Jesus as man] hung on the cross experiencing God’s curse for our sins, Jesus had to make a choice. He could not save Himself and the world at the same time. And He did make the supreme choice. He chose to die eternally that you and I may live in His place. That is what transformed the disciples. They were so shocked! They had not understood such love before as this. It is this concept of agape that turned the world upsidedown, that God not only came down for thirty-three years, but Jesus their Savior was willing to say good-bye to life forever that they may live in His place. “But God demonstrated His love that while we were still sinners Christ died for us” (Romans 5:8).

In other words, the supreme sacrifice is that Jesus was willing to accept our curse and give us His life in exchange. It was not a question of saving Himself and the world. He could not do that. He had to make a choice between the world and Himself. Do you know what Christ was saying on the cross? I hope you will never forget this; [:"red"]He was saying that He loves us more than Himself.[/] That is God’s agape.

There is no self in agape!

Rob

[Robert]

To one who, during the Saviour's ministry, offered to follow him…, Jesus said, "The foxes have holes, and the birds of the air have nests; but the Son of man hath not where to lay his head." Those who follow him must share his poverty. "If any man will come after me," he declares, "let him deny himself, and take up his cross, and follow me." "So shall ye be my disciples." RH 7-4-12

[Robert]

Quote:

---

Ed Dickerson said:

Your logic leads to an impossible end.

---

Yeah...it makes you a sinner falling short of God's love! Deal with it or get more self-righteous.

Again, note Christ's logic to those who think they can gain heaven by being good:

• "You shall love your neighbor as yourself.”

  What does this mean according to the context?

  The young man said to Him, “All these things I have kept; what lack I yet?”

  Jesus said to him,

  “If you wish to be perfect [i.e., if you really "love your neighbor as yourself"], go and sell your possessions and give to the poor....

  That's the context, period!

[there buster]

Quote:

---

Quote:

---

Ed Dickerson said:Your logic leads to an impossible end.

---

Yeah...it makes you a sinner falling short of God's love! Deal with it or get more self-righteous.

---

Sorry, your logic doesn't make me anything.

It's interesting that you respond to a logical point with a personal attack. Once again you arrogate to yourself God's prerogatives. Bad form.

Perhaps that's your idea of Christ-likeness. Perhaps that's your idea of loving your neighbor.

Neither your logic nor your treatment of those you disagree with recommends your position.

[David Koot]

Quote:

---

Robert said:

They had homes "in common".....There was no "self" as in "mine"!

---

The Biblical phrase raises interesting questions about both the meaning of the words, and property ownership in that culture, at the time. I seem to recall that under Jewish civil law, each family had land, dating back to the division of Canaan in the days of Joshua. The land allocated to each family unit, was not to be alienated, beyond a term of years. In the year of Jubilee, any land so alientated, was to revert to its original owner. From those facts, as recorded in Leviticus, I think, I would say that property ownership was part of God's plan for His people.

I haven't studied what the returned exiles did, during the Restoration, but I expect that some effort was made to restore land to those families who returned. Given the Jews' determination to comply with God's law, this time around, it would seem reasonable to expect at least an attempt to comply with the provisions of the Jewish civil law, in regard to property ownership.

Aside from issues of Jewish civil law, the land on which homes had been built, in the city of Jerusalem and its suburbs, unquestionably had to be 'owned' by someone. I believe the concept and importance of land ownership was widespread in ancient societies, as well as today. For example, Abraham purchased land from one of the Amorites. Jeremiah purchased land, shortly before the Exile. SOMEONE had to own the land. In Jewish society, the family unit was to own the land. In other societies, there may have been other structures of land ownership. This seems like an intriguing sociological issue. Certainly, in some societies, the State owned the land.

Robert, you suggested in an earlier post on this thread, that the early church practiced NT communism. However, in communism, am I incorrect in recalling that the State owned the land? I don't believe that the church owned the houses and land, although there is evidence that believers sold property and gave the MONEY to the church. In those days, the church was not a legal entity capable of holding title to land. It was not even recognized by Jewish law or society. At any rate, another important reason why SOMEONE needed to own land in Jerusalem, was the assessment of taxes. And, of course, responsibility for the land.

As to the issue of the early church and ownership of homes . . . In order for the early believers to literally hold real property in common, then each believer's name would need to be added. You would, therefore, have thousands of names attached to each and every home of a believer. That does not make sense, nor would it be feasible. Nor, do I expect, would such have been acceptable to the local government.

A more reasonable alternative pertains not to actual OWNERSHIP of the homes, but to how those who did own homes, shared the USE of those homes with others. The record tells us that every day the believers met from house to house, taking their meals together. It looks like those who owned property, shared with others who may have been less fortunate. That would, however, leave the actual ownership of the property intact. Homeowners would not have sold their only places of residence, but they apparently shared the use of their residences, to some extent, and may well have sold other pieces of property. And, I expect that the believers still had their own private space and private time. It wasn't one big commune.

David Koot

[Gerr]

Quote:

---

They had homes "in common".....There was no "self" as in "mine"! That comes from Satan the founder of "self"!

---

[:"blue"]Robert, I don't know whether to laugh or cry. You are attributing the work of God to Satan. It was God who was the creator of "self", and Satan the inventor of "selfishness".

[:"red"]Every human being, created in the image of God, is endowed with a power akin to that of the Creator - individuality, power to think and to do. Ed 17 [/]

Individuality. That is self in its most unique form. God is not a cookie cutter, making everyone alike. Your doctrine of "selflessness", i.e. no self, nothingness, reminds me of Buddha's doctrine of Nirvana. Yea, when one has divested one's self of all possessions, all desires, all references to self, one reaches Nirvana. [/]

Gerry