I got the following email today and it really blessed my heart. I don’t know how God does these things through stuff I’ve written, but I’m always blessed to see people find freedom in the way God thinks, rather than clinging to religious views that only lead to false security and actions:
I had no idea what you all are dealing with in this situation as a Mom, but I love what God has settled in your heart. It is my contention that religion cannot figure out how to love what it does not condone. In fact religion uses ‘love’ as a weapon so that we can manipulate people after our own desires. Jesus, on the other hand had the amazing freedom to love what he did not condone. His love for people and condoning their destructive choices never got confused. That’s why the world would come to him and discover the fountain of life. He could both love them where they were while he freed them from the bondages that tormented their souls.
May we be like he was in the world…
Good article Wayne. Thank you whomever for sharing this with us all. It is awesome to see how God is working in his children’s hearts. What love is this? How can we begin to even explain or justify it. It just is. This article really encouraged me to love others no matter what. No matter what they do, no matter what they say, I get the freedom to choose to love them. Nothing can stop me, and in the end, nothing can stop love.
Good article Wayne. Thank you whomever for sharing this with us all. It is awesome to see how God is working in his children’s hearts. What love is this? How can we begin to even explain or justify it. It just is. This article really encouraged me to love others no matter what. No matter what they do, no matter what they say, I get the freedom to choose to love them. Nothing can stop me, and in the end, nothing can stop love.
Yes
May we be like he was in the world…
And love even those who don’t deserve it. And may we remember that we don’t deserve it either!
Yes
May we be like he was in the world…
And love even those who don’t deserve it. And may we remember that we don’t deserve it either!
It is amazing, isn’t it?
I have to say, though…a lot of people don’t understand the concept (as in non-Christians). For instance, as a singer, there are often a lot of gay men around me. Now, I don’t condone their lifestyle, but I still love them! They (and others not in the faith) don’t understand this concept at all. It’s very easy – and common – for them to reject me completely because they don’t understand that I do love them, just not their choices.
How does one explain this? It’s quite a paradox.
It is amazing, isn’t it?
I have to say, though…a lot of people don’t understand the concept (as in non-Christians). For instance, as a singer, there are often a lot of gay men around me. Now, I don’t condone their lifestyle, but I still love them! They (and others not in the faith) don’t understand this concept at all. It’s very easy – and common – for them to reject me completely because they don’t understand that I do love them, just not their choices.
How does one explain this? It’s quite a paradox.
Is it just me or isn’t there something wrong with the title of the blog as well as with this statement, "Jesus on the other hand had the amazing freedom to love what he did not condone?" To me, they both sound like an oxymoron. If what ‘we do not condone’ is contrary to the character of God, how can you love that?’ Did Jesus love the adultery of the woman in John 8, for example? There seems something wrong in the terminology used which twists the meaning of the concept being explained. As thing things read, it seems to put on incompatible burden on a person to love both the WHAT they do not condone and the WHO doing it. Isn’t the word WHAT in the title and sentence quoted out of place?
The next sentence in the blog – after the one quoted above – seems to have the concept and terminology rightly stated: "His love for people and condoning their destructive choices never got confused." Isn’t it that we love the one WHO doing what we do not condone while still ‘hating’ WHAT they do because WHAT they do is inconsistent with the character of God (not just my personal dislike)?" It seems that Miss O’Hara has the concept and terminology consistent.
Would a more appropriate title be something like, "Loving those who do what we do not condone"? And the sentence quoted first be, "Jesus on the other hand had the amazing freedom to love the one who did what he did not condone?" At least, that is the way I see it.
Richard,
Did you read the whole article? Wayne wrote, "Jesus, on the other hand, had the amazing freedom to love what he did not condone. HIS LOVE FOR PEOPLE AND THE CONDONING OF THEIR DESTRUCTIVE CHOICES NEVER GOT CONFUSED."
Could the title of the blog have been put in a different way, sure. However, lets not just see what we want to see, but rather what is actually there. Wayne is clearly NOT saying that Jesus loves the sin, instead, he loves the individual person no matter what. I hope this helps.
Is it just me or isn’t there something wrong with the title of the blog as well as with this statement, "Jesus on the other hand had the amazing freedom to love what he did not condone?" To me, they both sound like an oxymoron. If what ‘we do not condone’ is contrary to the character of God, how can you love that?’ Did Jesus love the adultery of the woman in John 8, for example? There seems something wrong in the terminology used which twists the meaning of the concept being explained. As thing things read, it seems to put on incompatible burden on a person to love both the WHAT they do not condone and the WHO doing it. Isn’t the word WHAT in the title and sentence quoted out of place?
The next sentence in the blog – after the one quoted above – seems to have the concept and terminology rightly stated: "His love for people and condoning their destructive choices never got confused." Isn’t it that we love the one WHO doing what we do not condone while still ‘hating’ WHAT they do because WHAT they do is inconsistent with the character of God (not just my personal dislike)?" It seems that Miss O’Hara has the concept and terminology consistent.
Would a more appropriate title be something like, "Loving those who do what we do not condone"? And the sentence quoted first be, "Jesus on the other hand had the amazing freedom to love the one who did what he did not condone?" At least, that is the way I see it.
Richard,
Did you read the whole article? Wayne wrote, "Jesus, on the other hand, had the amazing freedom to love what he did not condone. HIS LOVE FOR PEOPLE AND THE CONDONING OF THEIR DESTRUCTIVE CHOICES NEVER GOT CONFUSED."
Could the title of the blog have been put in a different way, sure. However, lets not just see what we want to see, but rather what is actually there. Wayne is clearly NOT saying that Jesus loves the sin, instead, he loves the individual person no matter what. I hope this helps.