Love, love, love
This week someone put in our letterbox something you might call a Christian ‘tract’. On the front is says, ‘Father’s Love Letter – An intimate message from God to you’.
Being a Christian myself, I am always interested to receive tracts or other communications sent to me impersonally. They provide me with some insight into the approach of the Church to the world. I am standing in the place of an unbeliever, and my experience is to some extent what someone outside the Church might experience when the Church makes contact with them. Now you might say, someone who puts such a thing in my letterbox is not a typical Christian. But if that is the case, typical Christians are not typically making contact with me either. Except through Church where I am widely assumed to be Christian myself.
If the subjects of popular music are anything to go by, love – however that is understood – has long been a preoccupation of people the world over (though I confess I know little of what some cultures sing about). The experience of being ‘in love’ is the subject of much art and fantasy, and perhaps a conscious or subconscious quest of many people, despite being also often ridiculed, and when encountered, found often to be fleeting. Yet the everyday experience of more practical expressions of love is less than satisfying for many people, and an absence of love is depressing and I expect can be outright harmful.
So the presentation of a message from God as a message of love is certainly taking aim at a topic of general interest and undeniable importance to a very broad audience. lndeed, it is more or less an obsession of the human race.
I do not deny love has been an obsession of my own life, both in my desire to express it and experience it, and in my fascination with it and attempts to understand it. And I have struggled to fully take hold of the love of God as it is spoken about by many Christians (and to some extent, as it is spoken about in the Bible).
I am not a cynic. I have struggled long enough and been broken with such regularity that I am open to any instruction on a matter so important as this which I have failed to master. So while my willingness is low to believe that other Christians have a better understanding of love than myself (though I expect many have a much better practical grasp and experience of it) I do not think I was unreasonably averse to the message which arrived in our letterbox. If it is true, then I am ready to be ‘converted’ to any new understanding or experience of love, or of God. And it is likely I need to be.
So – what did this particular message contain?
The message contains 50 or so statements of one sentence each, with a scripture reference after each one. (The result is a bit jarring; imagine receiving a love letter from some person other than God with a reference after every sentence so you could look it up and verify it, e.g. ‘I loved the time we spent at the beach’ followed by the date and time interval and GPS coordinates of the location where the event took place. Nonetheless, it is important to know if something is supported by scripture; these articles of mine are often full of such references.)
The statements in the ‘Father’s Love Letter’ message represent the content of the scripture verses which are referenced after each, but rephrased as a direct statement from God to the reader. For example, the message begins, ‘My Child,’ and includes the statement, ‘You are fearfully and wonderfully made’, followed by a reference to Psalm 139:14. In the psalm, David says to God, ‘I am fearfully and wonderfully made’. So the statement of scripture has been redirected to read as if from God to the reader. And if the statement is true, and Jesus according to his own testimony is ‘the Truth’, then perhaps God is not averse to having such words placed in his mouth, as it were? And the Bible itself sometimes calls the scriptures the ‘word of God’?
I tend to think that to speak or to write prophetically in the first person as if God is speaking should be a living work of the Holy Spirit though the speaker, and such utterances cannot be constructed by logic or scholarship or good intentions. But I will not quibble. The paraphrasing of scripture in the message so far as I can see more or less honours the meaning of the original, in terms of the specific content anyway. I am still pondering whether the whole package is a work of God or not. But on the surface of it there is nothing outright offensive or untrue about what is written. (I will not reproduce the whole message here; the fine print on the back of the tract associates it with ©1999 FathersLoveLetter.com – I expect it can be easily found on the internet. Evidently it has been around for a while.)
I have read the whole Bible myself more than once; some parts I have read many times. None of the scriptures in the message were unfamiliar to me, and as said, their re-phrasing as statements to me personally by and large preserves their original meaning. To construct a personal letter with a certain theme from disparate verses of scripture plucked from throughout the Bible is certainly what might be termed ‘cherry picking’, however, if one believes the Bible is true and consistent, as I believe, that is not especially problematic. So long as the meaning of the original verse is carried over from its Biblical context; and it seems to me generally that is the case.
So then – was I transformed by the letter? By a bombardment of scripture saying wonderful, true things to me, expressed as if from the mouth of God to me personally? No, I was not.
I can say, over time, I have been transformed by scripture, undoubtedly less than I might have been had I been more attentive. And perhaps my previous exposure to these scriptures blunted the impact that someone might have felt who was reading them – or their re-phrased forms – for the first time. But it seemed to me almost as if the message was like taking a couple who are having marital problems, and by way of therapy, placing them in a room together where they are required to repeat to each other, ‘I love you, I love you,’ incessantly for an extended period. In other words, drumming it in. But I think that while such a method might result in the participants being somewhat shell-shocked (that was a little bit how I felt after reading the tract) I am doubtful that such a method would be successful in solving relationship issues, and restoring a relationship of love. From what little I understand, love does not work that way.
How then, in actual fact, does God express his love to us in the Bible?
I believe the Bible is God’s love letter to each one of us. Not any kind of extract, or summary. I have heard it said that good things take time. It takes time to read the Bible. Perhaps it takes at least that long for the message to begin to sink in?
It is also worth considering what God means by ‘love’. This is the biggest subject in the universe so undoubtedly I won’t get across it here. But in picking out verses of scripture which are designed exclusively to present a picture of God’s love for us – a very small selection of scripture out of the whole Bible – the writer of ‘Father’s Love Letter’ has necessarily used their understanding of what exactly is God’s love, so they can focus on the right bits of the Bible to use. But all of the Bible is what God considered should be written down for the people he loves. All of it, in some way, speaks of his love. Or else, the context we need to know to recognize God and his love in our lives and in our world.
I know we should not overthink this. Jesus says we should receive the kingdom of God as little children. Well, children know what it is to be loved. Nonetheless, parents also do many things out of love for their children which the children don’t recognize as love, including at times things which the children hate.
One particular fondness I have for the King James Bible is that in the great discourse on love in 1 Corinthians 13, it does not use the word ‘love’. It speaks of ‘charity’. I believe that with God, love is selfless, and intensely practical. Love does what is good for the loved one, and it does it completely. With God, love is not primarily a feeling; it is action.
In the New Testament we read, ‘As it is written, Jacob have I loved, but Esau have I hated.’ (Romans 9:13)
How is that true? Does the Bible not say:
‘For God so loved the world, that he gave his only begotten Son, that whosoever believeth in him should not perish but have everlasting life.’ (John 3:16)
If God so loves ‘the world’ – how could he not love Esau, the firstborn son of his beloved chosen, Isaac?
‘And Isaac loved Esau, because he did eat of his venison; but Rebekah loved Jacob.’ (Genesis 25:28)
If Isaac loved Esau, could not God love him also? Could the love of a man for his son be greater than the love of God for the same?
I have come to the conclusion that the above scripture gives an insight into what God means when he speaks of ‘love’. God allowed for Esau to lose his birthright, then his blessing from his father Isaac as his firstborn. It was Jacob who took these things from Esau by coercion and deception. But God could have, and undoubtedly does prevail over all such matters, particularly with regard to those of unparalleled importance in the story of history he is telling. And Isaac, Esau and Jacob are such people.
I believe it would have been heartbreaking for God to see the path that Esau fell into. To see him lose his birthright and blessing, and to fail to take hold of all that was rightfully his. But the truth was, he did not treasure those things which were treasure indeed. Jacob treasured them, and so God did not intervene to withhold them from Jacob, or to secure them for Esau, to whom they naturally belonged. God’s ‘hatred’ of Esau was what God did, or did not do – not what God felt. And what God did was right, as it always is.
God loves Esau, but his actions towards him were as one who hated Esau; because the actions of Esau required that. So by his own confession God says, ‘Esau have I hated’, though it could equally be said that he loves him. But with God, love is action.
Jesus said:
‘The law and the prophets were until John: since that time the kingdom of God is preached, and every man presseth into it.’ (Luke 16:16)
The above statement by Jesus presents two major eras of God’s dealings with man, or ‘dispensations of grace’ I think some may call them. We are still in the second of those eras – the preaching of the kingdom of God, with men entering into it. This then is the message of the love of God for his people in our day – the same message of the kingdom preached by John, and subsequently by Jesus himself. (Indeed, most people who have heard that message heard it in modern times; and only a tiny number of those who have received it did so in New Testament Israel.) So what was, and is, that message?
‘In those days came John the Baptist, preaching in the wilderness of Judaea, And saying, Repent ye: for the kingdom of heaven is at hand.’ (Matthew 3:1-2)
Moreover, Jesus brought the same message:
‘From that time Jesus began to preach, and to say, Repent: for the kingdom of heaven is at hand.’ (Matthew 4:17)
Three of the gospels contain no record at all that Jesus ever said to any of his disciples, ‘I love you’. Only John records this directly; first with regard to God generally, as recorded above in John 3:16. Then in the great, final address by Jesus to his disciples before his crucifixion, it is recorded that Jesus confesses his love for them.
‘As the Father hath loved me, so have I loved you: continue ye in my love.’ (John 15:9)
Why was not the message of Jesus as he preached the kingdom throughout his ministry, ‘I love you, I love you – the Father loves you’?
I believe the answer to that question is again, because love is not about itself – it is all for the sake of the one loved. It does not speak as it pleases – it speaks for the good of the loved one.
If I were to see one that I loved setting out in a car across a bridge that I knew to be broken, and bound to fail, would I say to them, I love you?
I would say to them, do not venture across that bridge. That is what I would say, because that is what they need to hear from me, if indeed I love them.
So it is with God. The love of God is so unspeakably precious, that when he plainly declares it, and we neglect it as to some extent we always do, we are then further from his love than before. Not because he wishes it; it is simply the outcome of our own doing.
Rather, God tells us what we need to hear to bring us closer. And if we are ready to respond, he tells us what we need to do to experience his love. In the example of Jesus’ and John’s preaching above: repent. Unless we repent we are not on a path to experience God’s love, but to be separated from it. So, love speaks that which the loved one needs to hear. Not what the one who loves, who is God, is feeling, or what he might wish to say.
Consider the messages of Jesus to the churches in Revelation 2 & 3. These are letters by the Bridegroom to his Bride, no less. There is not one statement, ‘I love you’. Jesus’ love is implied in his messages to the churches in Philadelphia (‘I will make them … to know that I have loved thee) and in Laodicea (‘As many as I love, I rebuke and chasten: be zealous therefore, and repent). And if you have ears to hear, it is in the message of Jesus to every church. If you would hear the love of Jesus for his Church expressed, read Revelation 2 & 3. These messages are very far removed from the ‘Father’s Love Letter’ tract.
And so I think we have mistaken what it is that the godless world needs to hear from God. Because I find the ‘Father’s Love Letter’ message similar in many ways to what I hear preached in the contemporary Church. Also, simply the fact it is a message only, on paper, with no contact details, posted anonymously in my letterbox. Jesus came in the flesh to show God’s love; we must also embody his love in flesh and blood to those whom we would reach with his message. I suspect that many who are ready to be reached are very much in need of practical, flesh and blood assistance; not a page of scripture, without denying the greater power of those words when received.
‘Father’s Love Letter’ ends with the words, ‘My question is… Will you be my child? John 1:12-13. I am waiting for you. Luke 15:11-32.’
Yet the statements in the message to that point say many times that I am already God’s child, and it is bewildering to think I could have any say in the matter. It states that God loves me completely and is always with me, and knew me before I was born. But that I should ‘come home’? How on earth would I do that? And where is home, if God is already with me here? And he is waiting? For what?
Apparently I have to ‘receive Jesus’. But he is already here and with me always? What can I do to receive him? (I am speaking as if I had no other knowledge of the Bible from which to fill in the gaps in the message; I am imagining how it might sound to someone in that position.)
It seems increasingly shunned in the Church today to imagine that our own choices and behaviour could have any bearing on our experience of the love of God. Jesus’ own message was the opposite. He states very clearly what we should do – repent (and there are plenty of practical details in the Bible what that may involve, and it is not just a ‘change of attitude’ or an intellectual dawning of faith – it means rejecting the practice of sin in our lives).
Jesus is much less vocal about any supposed feelings he has for us. Because if, like Esau, we choose a path that separates us from the love of God – what good are his feelings toward us then? (Though in truth I believe the feelings and the love of God will find expression toward us regardless – but that is another message, and not the one clearly given by Jesus.)
The love of God is action. The loving actions required of us, so that God’s love may reach us and live in us and touch those around us, are clearly stated in the Bible. The whole Bible that is, though the words of Jesus himself in the Gospels might be a good place to start. Do what he tells us, and the feelings will take care of themselves, sooner or later.
The love of God be with us all, always.
Amen.
(This may be the last edition of Sunday News for some time.)
wilderness99 