Christ's Law

[Carbon]

.
Hello;

Hello Odehgod
There is really a lot wrong with these things you post, you probably still have me on ignore, and that's okay. Nothing personal, it's just bad theology that I would like to point out.

There's been times during our 26+ years of internet forum activity when we
encountered people wanting to know what they're supposed to do now that they
decided to become a Christian.

Unbiblical point #1. No one decides to become a Christian. If it was up to man to decide to become a Christian, it would never happen.

A mega Baptist church that we attended back in the decade of the 1970's had a
discipleship program that incorporated an outreach booklet called "The Four
Spiritual Laws" authored in 1952 by Campus Crusade for Christ founder Dr. Bill
Bright.

The four spiritual laws have created a mess out of the gospel. Nothing biblical about them, it's man's way (humanism) and an abuse of the gospel.

Those guidelines are helpful as far as they go, but they're pretty elementary and in
our opinion inadequate for taking Christ's believing followers to infinity and beyond,
so to speak.

The four spiritual laws are misleading.
The first of the Four Spiritual Laws is, "God loves you and has a wonderful plan for your life.

now, I have to ask, how do you know the sinner you are preaching to, God loves? You don't. Nor does God's word teach you, or anyone else, to go out and tell the world that He loves them all.

Law 2; The second of the Four Spiritual Laws is, "Humanity is tainted by sin and is therefore separated from God. As a result, we cannot know God’s wonderful plan for our lives."


Friend, we are not tainted by sin. We are dead because of sin. Big difference.

Then law three states Jesus is God's only provision for our sin. and so, law 4, we must place our faith in him in order to receive the gift of salvation and receive God's wonderful plan for us.


The simple fact of the matter friend is not all plans for people are wonderful.
This is also a self-centered way of looking at the gospel. Why does God have to have a wonderful plan for everyone's life? What makes us so special?

What about all the people outside the Ark, drowning with their families? How wonderful was the plan for their lives?

 

[Odë:hgöd]

.
● 1Cor 16:22 . . If anyone love not The Lord, let him be accursed.

One's love of The Lord is exemplified by loyalty. (John 14:15, 14:21, 23-24)

Does a Muslim have to be a terrorist to be accursed? No; they only have to be a
loyal follower of Muhammad ibn `Abdullāh instead of a loyal follower of Jesus
Christ; same goes for Atheists, Nonreligious, Baha'i, Buddhists, Chinese
Universalists, Confucianists, Jains, Kabbalah mystics, Shintoists, Spiritists, Taoists,
Zoroastrians, Jews, Sikhs, and Hindus-- they're all accursed and there is nothing to
be gained in arguing about it.

How many people am I talking about? Well, as of mid 2014, worldwide there were:

550,000 Scientologists
1,500,000 Mormons
8,200,000 Jehovah's Witnesses
18,479,257 Seventh Day Adventists
7,794,000 Baha'i
515,951,000 Buddhists
451,292,000 Chinese Folk Religionists
8,424,000 Confucianists
974,597,000 Hindus
5,567,000 Jains
14,142,000 Jews
1,673,590 Muslims
2,819,000 Shintoists
24,918,000 Sikhs
14,183,000 Spiritists
8,660,000 Taoists
196,000 Zoroastrians
828,594,000 Nonreligious
692,111,000 Agnostics
136,483,000 Atheists.

The grand total of just those categories alone is 5,3387,550,257

If those figures are in the ball park, and if classical Christianity is the reality; then a
minimum of at least 75% of the world's 2014 global population of 7.2 billion people
weren't unified with Christ.

NOTE: Scientology, though not actually a religion, has an IRS tax status as such.

Joseph Smith's movement is a spin-off; in other words: there's some classical
Christianity in Mormonism, but comprises only a portion of Mormonism. The rest of
it is extreme, to say the least.

Neither do Jehovah's Witnesses qualify as Christians in the classical sense. Charles
Taze Russell's movement is a spin-off too. There's some classical Christianity in the
Watchtower Society's doctrines, but comprises only a portion of Russell's doctrines;
and his slant on it is very peculiar.

BTW: An informative book that I personally consider an essential volume in every
Christian's library is called "Kingdom Of The Cults" by Walter Martin.
_

 

[Odë:hgöd]

.
● 2Cor 2:6-8 . . The punishment inflicted on him by the majority is sufficient for
him. Now instead, you ought to forgive and comfort him, so that he will not be
overwhelmed by excessive sorrow. I urge you, therefore, to reaffirm your love for
him.

The cause for which Paul wrote that piece was a guy in the Corinthian church
sleeping with his stepmother (1Cor 5:1). Paul had instructed the congregation to
not only hold the man's feet to the fire, but also to ostracize him.

Some time had passed since then, and the man was apparently regretting his
actions, and broken off the illicit relationship with his kin, so it was time to let him
back into the group. No doubt the humiliation of it all had a tremendous impact
upon his attitude-- probably upon the congregation's too because at first their
attitude wasn't all that good about it either. (cf. 1Cor 5:2)

Here in America scolding and ostracizing a church member would probably just
make 'em resentful rather than repentant. (cf. Ps 51:17)

FAQ: Does 2Cor 2:5-10 support the Watchtower Society's shunning and/or
Scientology's disconnection?

REPLY: Those organizations practice vindictive forms of ostracizing that oftentimes
destroy friendship bonds, destroy family ties, destroy marriages, and even
endanger careers.

Christian ostracizing is pretty much limited to fellowship, i.e. congregational
functions, e.g. worship services, communion, prayer meetings, banquets, etc.
Extreme shunning practices put Christians in jeopardy of failing to comply with
Christ's instructions per Matt 5:44-48. (cf. 2Thess 3:14-15)

* A rough-hewn example for us to think about is located in the 15th chapter of
1Samuel wherein king Saul disobeyed God's instructions to utterly destroy Agag.
Afterwards Saul entreated Samuel to accompany him to church but the prophet
refused until the king fully admitted he was in the wrong.
_

 

[Odë:hgöd]

.
● 2Cor 2:10-11 . . If you forgive anyone, I also forgive him. And what I have
forgiven-- if there was anything to forgive --I have forgiven in the sight of Christ for
your sake, in order that Satan might not outwit us. For we are not unaware of his
schemes.

One of the opposition's tactics is to create disunity in a church. Sure enough when
that happens-- as when one portion of the congregation believes in judging and
ostracizing while the other doesn't --people start taking sides and the church will
end up divided into cliques and factions. According to the lord and master of New
Testament Christianity, a house divided against itself cannot stand.

Paul mentioned that his extension of forgiveness was "in the sight of Christ". There
exists some controversy as to the exact meaning but I think it's just saying that
Paul's forgiveness of that man was done in accordance with Christ's approval; to
the end that the Corinthians all go along with it, i.e. stand together as one in their
compliance with the apostle Paul's decisions.
_

 

[Odë:hgöd]

.
● 2Cor 5:20-21 . . We are therefore Christ's ambassadors, as though God were
making his appeal through us. We implore you on Christ's behalf: Be reconciled to
God.

There's two different aspects to reconciliation. One is a criminal justice kind of
reconciliation (e.g. Rom 5:6-11, Rom 6:3-11, 1John 2:2) and the other is a
fellowship kind of reconciliation. (e.g. Gen 4:1-7, Gen 5:22-24, Gen 6:9, Gen 17:1,
1John 1:3-7)

For example, a man and his wife may not be speaking to each other; and sleeping
in separate beds; but they're still married: they're just not getting along; in other
words, they're out of fellowship with one another. It's God's wishes that His own
walk with Him in fellowship while they're waiting for their departure; and the
Corinthians weren't doing very well at it.

In order to restore diplomatic relations between themselves and their Father above,
that congregation had to knuckle down and deal with sin in their midst in
accordance with their superior's wishes rather than their own. Compare Josh 7:2-26
where Moses' people couldn't win anymore battles until they first dealt with a sin in
their midst.

It's ironic that a fully functioning Christian church like the one at Corinth was in
need of reconciliation with God. How many Christian churches are just like that
today? They pride themselves in being Spirit-filled congregations, yet their
congregational attitude is completely out of touch with Christ. Yes, Christian
congregations are oftentimes out of touch and need to come to their senses and
reconnect or else they risk becoming like the church at Laodicea where the central
figure of Christianity is depicted outside the building banging on the door trying to
get someone's attention to let him in. (Rev 3:14-22)
_

 

[Odë:hgöd]

.
● 2Cor 6:1-2 . . As God's fellow workers we urge you not to receive God's grace in
vain; for He says: In the time of my favor I heard you, and in the day of salvation I
helped you. I tell you, now is the time of God's favor, now is the day of salvation.

Salvation is a project similar to tearing down a house and building it back better.
Well; the Corinthians had undergone the demolition phase in concert with Christ's
crucifixion and resurrection; but they were stuck in the rubble, so to speak.

Well; Paul said, in so many words; that they shouldn't wait till the afterlife to begin
building back better, rather, God wanted them to begin now, in this life.

"For you have spent enough time in the past doing what pagans choose to do--
living in debauchery, lust, drunkenness, orgies, carousing and detestable idolatry."
(1Pet 4:3 cf. Rom 6:1-14)
_

 

[Odë:hgöd]

.
● 2Cor 6:14-18 . . Be ye not unequally yoked together with unbelievers: for what
fellowship hath righteousness with unrighteousness? and what communion hath
light with darkness? and what concord hath Christ with Belial? or what part hath he
that believeth with an infidel? and what agreement hath the temple of God with
idols?

. . . For ye are the temple of the living God; as God hath said: I will dwell in them,
and walk in them; and I will be their God, and they shall be my people. Wherefore
come out from among them, and be ye separate-- saith The Lord --and touch not
the unclean thing; and I will receive you, And will be a Father unto you, and ye
shall be my sons and daughters --saith The Lord Almighty.

That commandment clearly forbids intermarriage between Christians and non
Christians. Failure to comply is not only grossly disobedient, but it's unwise and can
have tragic results; for example:

"When men began to increase in number on the earth and daughters were born to
them, the sons of God saw that the daughters of men were beautiful, and they
married any of them they chose." (Gen 6:1-2)

If we posit that the "sons of God" were believers and the "daughters of men" were
not; then it would appear that back in Noah's day, believing men threw caution to
the wind and built themselves harems of unbelieving women. What happened to
those believing men when it came time for the Flood? Well, for one thing; they had
lost their piety.

"The Lord then said to Noah: Go into the ark, you and your whole family, because I
have found you righteous in this generation." (Gen 7:1)

None of the other sons of God in that day were righteous; hence they weren't
invited aboard the ark. All of those men-- whose women were chosen based solely
upon sensual allure sans any spiritual prudence whatsoever --perished in the Flood
right along with everybody else.

Another incident is located at Nehemiah 13:23-31; which led to the break-up of
homes. Were Nehemiah to do so in our day, the politicized media would crucify him
for child abuse. But Nehemiah wasn't the one at fault. His people had entered into
unacceptable marriages.
_

 

[Odë:hgöd]

.
● 2Cor 7:1 . . Since we have these promises, dear friends, let us cleanse ourselves
from everything that contaminates body and spirit, perfecting holiness out of
deference to God's will.

Webster's defines "deference" as affected and/or ingratiating regard for another's
wishes. Deference is the opposite of resistance, rebellion, defiance, indifference,
stubbornness and/or doing things your own way.

Contaminations of one's body would include things like drug addiction, alcoholism,
adultery, promiscuity, gluttony, eating blood, etc.

Contaminations of the spirit likely refers to things that influence one's thinking
and/or have an effect upon the personality; for example: Critical Race Theory, the
political philosophies of Carl Marx, Mao Zedong, and Vladimir Lenin, Planned
Parenthood, Liberalism, LGBTQ sex education, transgender propaganda, anti
Semitism, certain kinds of television and/or internet entertainment, etc.

* The promises are those listed at 2Cor 6:14-18.
_

 

[Odë:hgöd]

.
● 2Cor 8:11-15 . . If the willingness is there, the gift is acceptable according to what
one has, not according to what he does not have. Our desire is not that others
might be relieved while you are hard pressed, but that there might be equality.

. . . At the present time your plenty will supply what they need, so that in turn their
plenty will supply what you need. Then there will be equality, as it is written: He
who gathered much did not have too much, and he who gathered little did not have
too little.

* The equality we're looking at here has nothing to do with banning private
property and/or mandatory distribution of wealth; viz: this is about generosity
rather than politics, so please don't attempt to defend and/or promote Socialism
with this passage.

It's inevitable that some churches would be disadvantaged compared to others. For
example: here in the USA's big cities, churches have no lack of resources to take
care of themselves; while small town churches are barely scraping by. The
charitable thing for the big-city church to do is take a small town church under its
wing, like any normal person would a needy relative. The idea here is to moderate
the small church's disadvantages and keep things closer to a level playing field, so
to speak, i.e. fair vs. unfair.

NOTE: "if the willingness is there" tells me that church officers should not pressure
and/or shame their people into sharing their abundance, viz: should not attempt to
break down their resistance; like talking people into buying cars and vacuum
cleaners, so to speak.

The directive is an excellent passage for debunking the so-called Faith Promise;
which is a popular scheme for seducing congregations into pledging money they
don't have while expecting God's providence will somehow provide it. That is not
the Lord's way. By means of Paul, the Lord says to help out with what you already
have, not what you hope to have later; I mean: it is not His wish to copy ENRON's
mark-to-market accounting practices and/or futures trading with pork bellies and
soy beans.
_

 

[Odë:hgöd]

.
● 2Cor 9:7 . . Each man should give what he has decided in his heart to give, not
reluctantly or under compulsion for God loves a cheerful giver.

Towards what end is the giving spoken of in the New Testament? To finance
ambitious building programs? Well; Christians back then met in homes. Did their
contributions go towards obtaining more homes to meet in? No.

Within the context of the New Testament; giving in the early church was charitable.
It met needs rather than expenses; and those needs were typically congregational
rather than universal; viz: their charity went towards those amongst themselves
and/or other congregations that were hungry, sick, injured, homeless, alone,
helpless, missionaries, full-time-church officers, orphans, widows, abandoned,
and/or oppressed, etc.
_

 

[Odë:hgöd]

.
● 2Cor 10:7 . . If anyone is confident that he belongs to Christ, he should reconsider
that we belong to Christ just as much as he.

It's amazing that any Christian's ego would be so inflated as to think themselves
holier than an apostle, However, there are some people out there infected with a
pretty bad case of conceit who are up to it.
_

 

[Odë:hgöd]

.
● 2Cor 13:5 . . Examine yourselves, whether you're in the faith; test your own
selves. Don't you know of your own selves, how that Jesus Christ is in you, unless
you're all reprobates?

The only proof-positive way for individuals to know for sure whether Christ is in
them is by getting it from the horse's mouth.

"The Spirit himself testifies with our spirit that we are God's children." (Rom 8:15)

The Greek word translated "testifies" means to corroborate; defined by Webster's
as: to support or help prove (a statement, theory, etc.) by providing information or
evidence.

This kind of support usually isn't public: it's private. In other words: it's one on one,
spirit to spirit, heart to heart. Needless to say then, this kind of corroboration is
supernatural rather than academic which is why Paul said to test "your own selves"
rather than others because no one but you and God together can do this for you.

Smokey the Bear says: Only you can prevent forest fires, whereas scripture says:
Only you can know whether Christ is in you.
_

 

[Odë:hgöd]

.
● Gal 1:8 . . Though we, or an angel from heaven, preach any other gospel unto
you than that which we have preached unto you, let him be accursed.

The Greek word for "accursed" in that passage basically has to do with banishment,
shunning and/or disassociation.

An application of this, within the epistle to Galatians, is 5:4 where it says:

"You who are trying to be justified by law have been alienated from Christ; you
have fallen away from grace."

Whenever Paul spoke of "law" he was usually referring to the five books of Moses
per Genesis, Exodus, Leviticus, Numbers, and Deuteronomy. So, in a nutshell; the
anathema clearly applies to people who insist that it's necessary to comply with the
Ten Commandments to get to Heaven, e.g. Acts 15:5.
_

 

[Odë:hgöd]

.
● Gal 5:1 . . Stand fast therefore in the liberty wherewith Christ hath made us free,
and be not entangled again with the yoke of bondage.

The yoke of bondage about which Paul wrote pertains to the covenant that Moses'
people agreed upon with God per Exodus, Leviticus, Numbers, and Deuteronomy;
which is described by Acts 15:10 as "neither our fathers, nor are we, able to bear"

A very serious problem with that covenant is that it allows neither pardon nor
atonement for willful disobedience.

"Anyone who sins defiantly, whether native-born or alien, blasphemes The Lord,
and that person must be cut off from his people. Because he has despised The
Lord's word and broken His commands, that person must surely be cut off; his guilt
remains on him." (Num 15:30-31)

FAQ: David knew that an affair with married Bathsheba would be adultery. How
then was God able to let him off with a mere rap on the knuckles, so to speak,
seeing as how that covenant was David's religion? (2Sam 2:13)

REPLY: David was a man of faith and also a prophet. He was spared a full cup of
the wrath of God by means of Jesus' crucifixion. (Rom 3:21-26 & 1Pet 1:10-11)

FAQ: Jesus was crucified ex post facto. How then was it legal to apply his cross to
David retroactively before it even took place?

REPLY: Jesus was designated, and scheduled, to give his life for the sins of the
world very early-on: prior to anything created. (1Pet 1:18-20 & Rev 13:8)
_

 

[Odë:hgöd]

.
● Gal 5:2-3 . . Listen! I, Paul, tell you that if you let yourselves be circumcised,
Christ will be of no value to you at all. Again I declare to every man who lets
himself be circumcised that he is obligated to obey the whole law.

The Greek word for "man" in the above passage is anthropos (anth' ro-pos) a
common word in the New Testament for humans of either gender. The specific word
for males is arrhen (ar'-hrane) and/or arsen (ar' sane).

Modern females undergo conversion to Judaism by means of a ritual bathing called
Mikveh; which, for them, is equivalent to male circumcision. The exact process by
which females in the Old Testament underwent conversion-- e.g. Ruth --is
unknown, but for certain, covenanted circumcision is specifically a requirement for
Jewish men. (Gen 17:9-14)

I think it safe to assume that the circumcision Paul warned against was a
nondescript label that included not only the male kind but also by whatever means
that females in his day underwent conversion to Judaism.

Seeing as how the covenant that Moses' people agreed upon per Exodus, Leviticus,
Numbers, and Deuteronomy doesn't specify a God-given procedure for female
conversion to Judaism, then I'd guess that just about any method would be
sufficient so long as the ritual is conducted by someone authorized to do so.

"he is obligated to obey the whole law" would include not only the edicts, statutes,
rules, and judgments relative to one's personal conduct, but also compliance with
the ritual sacrifices; which are inconvenient to say the least.
_

 

[Odë:hgöd]

.
● Gal 5:13a . . You, my brethren, were called to be free. But do not use your liberty
to indulge the base nature;

Christ's followers are sometimes accused of practicing a religion that gives people a
license to steal, so to speak. Well; that's true to a certain extent because his
followers do have immunity from any, and all, of the curses that the Old Testament
imposes on scofflaws per Lev 26:3-38, Deut 27:15-26, and Deut 28:1-69 because
their association with God is via a different covenant wherein are no curses for non
compliance.

So then; for sure there's a bit of a "moral hazard" within Christianity. However, God
prefers that people dead to Old Testament law not allow human nature be the
dominant force in their lives. (e.g. Rom 6:1-13 and Col 3:1-17)
_

 

[Odë:hgöd]

.
● Gal 5:16 . . I say then: walk in the Spirit, and you shall not fulfill the lust of the
base nature.

Some years ago, in a boatyard where I was employed, a young Christian boasted
of his dedication to Christ. So I asked him: What about the command to walk in
the Spirit? How are you doing with that one?

Well, the brash, pleased-with-himself youngster admitted he didn't even know what
that meant, let alone how to do it. (chuckle) In regards to "dedication" Mr. Super
Saint hadn't even got to first base yet. (judging by the fact that was on a third
marriage the last time we spoke, I'd have to say he never did get the hang of it.

Anyway, there's nothing mystical about this. Walking in the Spirit is just simply
complying with Christ's instructions rather than letting your natural impulses and/or
your own thinking control your conduct all the time.

For example: "Abstain from food tainted by idols, from promiscuity, from the meat
of strangled animals, and from blood." When a Christian complies with those
instructions; they're walking in the Spirit, but when they're indiscriminately eating
whatever, drinking whatever, and sleeping around without regard for God's feelings
about it; then they're fulfilling the desires of the base nature. It's that simple.

NOTE: The Greek word translated "lusts" can refer to bad lusts as well as good. For
example:

"And he said to them: I have eagerly desired to eat this Passover with you before I
suffer." (Luke 22:15)

Christ's eager desire is translated from the same Greek word as the lusts spoken of
in Gal 5:16
_

 

[Odë:hgöd]

.
● Gal 5:25-26 . . Since we live in the Spirit, let us also walk in the Spirit. Let us
not be conceited, provoking one another, envying one another.

The sentient consciousness we have as our normal selves is dried up, i.e. it's
decrepit and infertile. (John 6:53 & Eph 2:1) whereas regeneration gives folks
something viable and sustainable. (John 3:3-8 & John 4:10-14)

Webster's defines "conceit" as excessive self-appreciation of one's own worth or
virtue.

To my knowledge, there's nothing intrinsically wrong with having strong core values
and/or believing in yourself, but if you should find yourself somewhat indignant
and/or resentful when others don't believe in you, or when they think very little of
your core values; then watch out because that's a symptom of conceit, and it will
hinder you from complying with The Lord's instructions in regard to getting along
with fellow believers.

The Greek word translated "provoke" basically means to challenge; viz: to get in
somebody's face in an obnoxious, assertive, militant manner.

The Greek word for "envy" basically means hostile toward a rival, or towards
someone believed to enjoy an advantage. In other words: we're talking about a
competitive spirit-- not the good-natured, friendly kind but a malicious kind of
competitive spirit that resents others doing better than itself, or more popular than
itself, or more recognized than itself, or more admired than itself; viz: it's all about
self.

Rivalry is a very destructive passion. It got Abel slain by his own brother, and it got
Christ slain by his own people. Rivalry makes otherwise sensible people behave
contrary to their own better judgment, and gets them embroiled in oftentimes
unnecessary vendettas; e.g. gender rivalry, political rivalry, financial rivalry, and
racial rivalry. Those kinds of rivalries are very destructive influences.
_

 

[Odë:hgöd]

.
● Gal 6:1a . . Brethren, even if someone is caught in the very act of any trespass,
you who are spiritual restore such a one in a spirit of gentleness;

NOTE: The instructions given in Gal 6:1 pertain only to spiritual Christians. The
garden variety-- the rank and file pew warmers --need not burden themselves with
it.

The Greek word for "trespass" is interesting. It can refer to willful misconduct
and/or unintentional misconduct.

For example the same Greek word at Rom 5:18 describes Adam's decision in the
forbidden fruit incident, which we know for sure wasn't due to either ignorance or
deception. (1Tim 2:14)

Seeing as how the willful variety is dealt with harshly and summarily per 1Cor 5:1
13, whereas in this situation gently, then I'd say Gal 6:1 is referring to
unintentional misconduct; which doesn't merit a public flogging; but rather a quiet
talk; and the more private the better in order to avoid embarrassing the
unintentional offender.

* Restoration does not apply to visitors; only to members on a church's roles; i.e.
the congregation. The visitors' business is none of our business so don't go sticking
your nose in it.

The Greek word for "restore" basically means to repair or adjust, viz: restoration
applies to maladjusted Christians, i.e. the ones whose misconduct is habitual, and
quite possibly detrimental to a church's overall health.

A spirit of gentleness precludes the use of bullying, intimidation, rage. yelling,
demeaning comments, lecturing, scolding, biting sarcasm, ugly remarks, carping
criticism, brow beating, and such. Those methods aren't gentle, no, they're
abusive. They're also unwarranted when the accused has committed an
unintentional trespass.

In churches where people are conceited, assertive, confrontational, embroiled in
petty rivalries, debating, quarreling, and maybe even jostling for notoriety; the
spiritual ones are obviously going to be as scarce as California Condors

● Gal 6:1b . . each one looking to yourself, lest you too be tempted.

The Greek word for "tempted" is somewhat ambiguous. It primarily means to test;
but can also mean endeavor, scrutinize, entice, and/or discipline.

I think what the restorers are being cautioned against is going about a right thing in
a wrong way so that they themselves wind up taken to task for conduct
unbecoming. In some people's minds, the end justifies the means so long as it
benefits the so-called greater good. But that's Machiavellian thinking rather than
Christian thinking.

In other words: the restorers need to tread lightly because if they go after an
alleged offender like a lynch mob; then they themselves should expect to be seen
by others as a toxic menace and detrimental to congregational peace, trust, and unity.
_

 

[Odë:hgöd]

.
● Gal 6:2 . . Bear one another's burdens, and thus fulfill the law of Christ.

Human nature tends to shun people with problems, as if they were lepers, so they
don't drag us into a world of inconvenience and/or negativity. But that is not what I
call fulfilling the law of Christ; which reads like this:

"A new command I give you: Love one another. As I have loved you, so you must
love one another. By this all men will know that you are my disciples, if you love
one another." (John 13:34-35)

The love that is defined by "As I have loved you" is a kind of love willing to suffer
inconvenience, shame, humiliation, embarrassment, disgrace, and even death for
the sake of another. Christ's love isn't a fault-finding attitude; it's a supportive
virtue: it doesn't only feel your pain, it gets involved in your pain.

Church can be the loneliest place on earth when nobody cares enough about you to
get involved in your pain; but instead would just as soon not know about it. Sadly,
there is about as much love for one another in modern churches as there is
amongst an audience of strangers at the movies. I sincerely believe that a lot of
that indifference has to do with modern churches just simply being too big, too
busy, and too complex.
_