Blog

by Nathan Buck

This past week I had some great conversations with close friends about how to handle people in our lives. Whether it’s our own children, our parents, co-workers, clients, or patients, there was a consistent theme - responding with love and not being captive to expectations.

Read Romans 13:8-10: "Let no debt remain outstanding, except the continuing debt to love one another, for whoever loves others has fulfilled the law… whatever other command[s] there may be, are summed up in this one command: 'Love your neighbor as yourself.' Love does no harm to a neighbor. Therefore love is the fulfillment of the law."

The initial point of this passage is clear: any debt we have with another should be settled immediately. We should live free from having others waiting on us to repay a loan or a favor. No one should be waiting on us to pay a debt, not even a debt of gratitude or an expression of our love. We should actively be resolving what we owe others and proactively seeking to give to the one debt we owe everyone, love.

Have you ever felt the weight of other's expectations so heavily that it made it hard for you to make the best decision? Have you ever felt like no matter how much more you give, it's never appreciated? Have you ever felt paralyzed because no matter what you do, someone is going to be upset with you?

Living by what others expect is a "no win" situation. Emotionally, we are always caught in somebody's net, and we end up exhausting ourselves trying to please everyone. These are FALSE debts. They are not a reflection of what is good, and sometimes are not even a reflection of what is real. They will drive us to an unhealthy, and unholy, place where we end up trying to be everyone's savior and everyone's favorite person. False debts should never be "paid," because the only way to pay them is to play god.

The only debt that should be between us and another person is the debt to love. I can love someone and not agree with them. I can love someone and let them be mad at me, because I did what was best instead of what they wanted. I can love someone and still not ignore their sin or rebellion. I can love someone and still offer correction or discipline in their life. I can love someone and forgive their angry yelling over their broken expectations. I can love someone and let them wander farther into a dangerous place, because they were not ready to deal with the deeper issue that is hurting them. I can continue to love someone who rejects my Lord Jesus Christ, because He patiently loved me when I still rejected Him.

So, maybe we get the initial point of this passage, but let's also remember to avoid fulfilling false debts, because that is NOT love, it's patronizing.

The only debt we owe to anyone is our love: expressing God's love through us. If the only thing you owe your family, friends, co-workers, enemies, etc. is love, how will you love them differently?

May you satisfy any outstanding debts you do owe, and may you be free from the false debts created from expectations and insecurity. May you find freedom in relentlessly loving others, the way God loves all of us.

This forum is meant to foster discussion and allow for differing viewpoints to be explored with equal and respectful consideration.  All comments are moderated and any foul language or threatening/abusive comments will not be approved.  Users who engage in threatening or abusive comments which are physically harmful in nature will be reported to the authorities.

by Charlie Wolcott

Faith is a topic that is often grossly misunderstood. Christians are often accused of depending on faith because we have no evidence. But what is this accusation actually saying? According to Dictionary.com, faith has a number of definitions. The one cited in this claim is #2. Other dictionaries I’ve seen have it down to #5. The idea is that faith is belief without evidence, and if you have evidence, you don’t need faith. Let me clear this up and set the record straight.

The definition being referenced is talking about blind faith: trust without reason for the trust. But is this really what faith is? Take a look at who defines faith this way. It’s the secularists. The Evolutionists. The one that rejects the notion of a supernatural being that oversees everything. They claim to be without need for faith because they have science. But is this really so? The truth is, these people have far more faith than they ever wish to think they could have. Let’s find out what it really is.

Hebrews 11 is the famous chapter on the “Heroes of Faith,” the great heroes of the Old Testament that acted in faith. First this chapter defines faith in the first verse. “Now faith is the assurance of things hoped for, the evidence of things unseen.” This doesn’t sound like “blind faith” at all, does it? But go around and look at the different religions out there. They all define faith somewhat along these lines. The only ones that define faith as “blind” are the ones that mock the idea. Yet they are the ones that exercise the most faith of all.

Let’s dig deeper into this. Last spring, I wrote about the Armor of God. One of the pieces of the Armor of God is a shield. There is nothing that gives a better picture of faith than a shield. Why? Because every soldier that takes cover behind his shield is putting every bit of trust into that shield to protect him. His very life depends on that shield doing its job. This is critical to understand. Faith is an action that puts your dependence on that object holding up to what it is supposed to do. What other examples of faith do we see?

There are very minor examples, such as sitting down in your chair. You put your trust in that chair to hold you up. Some may say: “I’ve sat in this chair over and over again. I KNOW it will hold.” That may be so, but you did NOT know it would hold that time. You assumed it. Based on prior experience, you assumed it. You had assurance that it would hold. You had evidence that it would hold. You trusted that it would hold. If you did not have faith, you would not have sat down in that chair.

Faith requires an object. You cannot just say “I believe” and that’s faith. Believe what? This is what James talks about in James 2:14-18. Some will argue that this passage is promoting a works-based salvation, but that is not so at all. It is addressing a misunderstanding and abuse of what faith really is. Faith requires an object, something you trust to do its job. It also requires action. It requires that you act on that object doing its job. If you believe that a chair is going to hold you, but you never sit on it, is that faith? No.

Eric Ludy uses an analogy that has really stuck with me in his book The Bravehearted Gospel. He is addressing the spirit of the open mind and uses the flat earth/round earth debate to illustrate. According to Ludy, the open-minded person will be open to the idea that the earth is flat and that the earth is round and will gladly have discussions with both sides. However, in action, such a person can only be a flat-earther because such a person will never join the round-earthers to build a ship and go sailing. Now, his point is on the dangers of being open minded, but I want to emphasize on the issue of faith. The open-minded person in this scenario is a practicing flat-earther because he trusts the position of the flat earth more than he trusts the position of the round earth. His faith is in the flat earth because he acts as though it is true, by refusing to go sailing.

Am I getting my point across yet? For some, I may not be. I mentioned earlier how the secularist, the Evolutionist, exercises faith when they vehemently deny they do. How do they exercise faith? They all talk about how science had done this or science has proven that. Has it? Have they personally done the experiments that unquestionably demonstrate Evolution being true? The answer is most have not. I will go as far as saying the Evolutionists themselves have not seen a single thing that is distinctly in support of Evolution and not ALSO in support of the Biblical claims. If you dig deeper, all the actual evidence cited (peppered-moths, e-coli, fruit flies, finch beaks, etc) actually fit the Biblical account, not the Evolutionary one. Because Evolution requires something much more than what is observed. And when examined, the Evolutionist, while denying it, will prove that evidence actually has nothing to do with it. How do I know? They all say “one piece of evidence would change their mind” and when presented with it, they don’t change their minds. It’s not about evidence. It never was. And they will also prove that it all boils down to who do you trust? The word of God or the words of their peers and of the self-proclaimed experts? In other words: It’s all about faith. Whose testimony, whose word, are you believing and trusting to be true?

So what about the 98% of all scientists that believe in Evolution? Ask them and 98% of that 98% will say something like, “I believe Evolution because 98% of all scientists believe Evolution.” It’s trust. It’s faith. And this one is blind. Their faith is not placed on the evidence but on the opinions of these experts, completely ignoring what God says. And these people DO act in faith that Evolution is true. Their rebellion against God depends on Evolution being true.

Faith also acts as trust in a person. The Evolutionist puts their faith in man, that the scientists are the top in all knowledge, and they depend on those claims being true. The Christian, however, depends on what the Bible says is true. Our faith, our dependence, is not in another human; it is not in a process, it is in God himself. Go back and read my posts about God being immutable and faithful. God is the only thing or person we can truly put our faith in because he will not fail to follow through and deliver on his promises. He is no magic genie that will bow to our wishes, but what he promises, he will pull through.

My faith is in God, in Jesus Christ, on what he did on that cross. And my actions prove it because what I do depends on HIM being true. Where is your faith? What do you trust? Who do you trust? What is it that your actions and your way of thinking depends on being true? That is where your faith lies. Everyone has faith. It is not always well placed, but everyone has it. And everyone exercises it. The question is not, “Do you have faith?” The question is, “What do you have faith in?”

This forum is meant to foster discussion and allow for differing viewpoints to be explored with equal and respectful consideration.  All comments are moderated and any foul language or threatening/abusive comments will not be approved.  Users who engage in threatening or abusive comments which are physically harmful in nature will be reported to the authorities.

by Steve Risner

[This blog post is part of a series. The previous one is here and the next one is here.]

Bad things happen. That’s just the way it is. It wasn’t always like this, but man strayed from the plan. Now we have all sorts of terrible things going on. We’ve no one to blame but ourselves. In fact, if you are a believer and don’t think the world was perfect BEFORE the Fall, I am wondering how you explain a great deal of Scripture—namely those that speak of heaven and, more specifically, the new heaven and new earth. The Bible states fairly unambiguously that the Tree of Life will be in heaven and that God will “restore” all things. The word “restore” means to return someone or something to a former condition, place, or position. If creation will be restored to a former condition and that condition isn’t a perfect place where there was no death or sickness or sadness, I’d be curious to hear what heaven will be like for the theistic evolutionist.

If you’ve not been keeping up with my writings over the past couple months, I’ve been going through a blog post by Tyler Francke he calls, “10 theological questions no young-earth creationist can answer.” You may think that this means I’ve been answering those 10 questions. However, up to this point, all I’ve been doing is responding to his introduction. Within that introduction is a paragraph full of links. The link this blog post will be responding to is found within the word “awfully” and is called “Otters do terrible things to baby seals, and it’s not God’s fault.” This entire paragraph full of links is supposed to be filled with terrible issues with Biblical creationist theology (which in and of itself is strange since it’s been the theology of Christianity for 2000 years and Judaism for much longer). The trouble is that most of the “theology” is just Tyler ranting about some idea (generally a strawman argument) that he’s made up in order to make Bible believers look foolish. We’ve seen “theology” about impact craters, tree rings, music groups, and the like. He does touch on a couple things that could be construed as theology—is God a liar? What’s the Tree of Life? But most of his “theology” issues show us he really doesn’t know what theology is. The study of the nature of God has little to do with ice layering, genetics, and starlight. Anyway, let’s move on to this week’s blog post of discussion. I’ve been trying to avoid it… but there’s nothing left to say.

The blog post in question is about the molestation and rape of one animal group on another. The first thing I’ll just throw out there is that Tyler, once again, is obsessing about Ken Ham. This entire writing is designed to bash Ken Ham’s organization, Answers in Genesis. He can’t get enough of it, I guess. He then goes on to say, “Otters are a great topic for proponents of young-earth creationism, because — for the most part — it allows them to discuss real scientific facts (like animal behavior and physiology) without endangering their worldview.” We’ve discussed the completely erroneous idea that a Biblical worldview and science are at odds many, many times. In fact, I think even in this blog post series in response to Tyler’s blog post we’ve touched on it many times. If you are still confused about it or if you actually do believe that a Biblical worldview is at odds with science, please read this, this blog post by Logan Ames, and this, but you can comb through my blog posts as well as many of the other writers’ blog posts and find this issue touched on. The truth is there is no reason to suggest creationists are not scientific unless you have no real argument and just want to discredit your opponent. It’s actually hard to take someone seriously who suggests this sort of thing since all of modern science was built by creationists save the study of Darwinism which is nothing more than a religious notion. Even the father of modern biology, Carl Linnaeus, was a creationist.

Tyler then makes a very common statement by evolutionists that confuses what the role of natural selection actually is or does. He states, “They can look at the otter’s dense, waterproof fur, webbed feet and muscular tail and claim them as the handiwork of a creative God — not the results of natural selection.” How could natural selection result in the acquisition of these traits? Of course, it cannot. Natural selection deals with what is already there. It cannot under any circumstance create a new trait. This is basic biology here. The evolutionist is always making this bogus statement but insists the creationist doesn’t know what he’s talking about. What this means is that the otter (or its ancestor) had to have had ALL of these traits in the past. Evolution cannot account for their origin. Only creationists can do that.

Now we finally arrive at what Tyler’s blog post is about—rape in the animal kingdom. After all that, the theological issue for Bible believers is animals “rape” animals and this is a problem for the Bible. I’m curious why Tyler stops with “rape.” Animals “murder” lots of others, as well. They kill their young. They can be cannibals. They’re promiscuous. They can be short tempered. They bite. They poop on your bed. They drink from the toilet. They can try to have sex with inanimate objects or your leg. Why stop there?

In the process of mockingly phrasing his complaint, he misapplies Scripture as well, which is another issue for another time. He describes for us his problem: “The problem, for YECs, is that it puts God in a rather undesirable place. Because if God is directly responsible for the otter’s wonderfully adapted marine physiology, than he is also directly responsible for the animal’s tendency to rape baby seals until they die.” He then issues a false dichotomy, which isn’t worth getting in to since it’s false. But Tyler actually tells us why this is—the Fall has corrupted this world. I’m not sure if he feels that since he flippantly announced the Biblical response to this issue that he’s somehow dealt with it. It just doesn’t work that way.

You see, in my worldview, God created a perfect world. But man chose disobedience and, therefore, corruption. The corruption of the Fall reaches to every part of creation according to Scripture. All of creation was subjected to the curse. Tyler here is suggesting that the Biblical God is evil for creating this, when the Biblical position is that man is responsible for it. However, what Tyler will not say but seems to think is that his god, the god of evolution, IS responsible for this. How blind to not be able to see the irony in his position here.

He attempts to explain why the Fall can’t be the reason for such things. But he, again, explains how he doesn’t seem to know very much about the Bible or the Biblical position. God didn’t MAKE all bad things happen with the Fall. Corruption ensued. Decay is a process. Man sold ownership, so to speak, of creation to Satan when he fell. He handed over dominion to the Father of Lies. Hence, the Fall allows Satan to do his handiwork.

I’ll point out also that he miserably fails to understand Biblical creation. He claims Adam and Eve never knew the otter existed because they aren’t from the Middle East. It’s so tiring correcting people who want to tell me I’m wrong when they don’t know what I believe. But what is still shocking to me is that he claims to be a follower of Christ. His next thing here is to quote someone saying why his argument (that bad things happen, essentially) is why they don’t believe in the God of the Bible. You see that? He’s using non-Christian arguments (their arguments for not being a follower of Christ) to support his position. But I’m supposed to believe he is a lover of Christ? Only a theistic evolutionist would be able to think such things. He also says, “I find it far more satisfying to view God as the sustainer and overseer of a vast creative process, rather than a tinkerer who has ‘designedly’ weaved cruelty and brutality into the fabric of the animal kingdom.” Why does he think the truth cares what satisfies him? He’s not even talking about the Biblical concept of God here in his objection. But the funny thing is a Biblical creationist would claim to adhere to the former portion of his statement rather than the latter. However, inserting the word “Designer” into that first half would be much more complete—God is the Designer, Sustainer, and Overseer of a vast creation, and I would say creation rather than creative process.

And finally, he tells us why his entire argument is incorrect. He simply explains the issue, and I can’t argue with it until he says it’s “nothing more” than a product of nature. It’s a product of nature as a result of the corruption of creation. So what we see here as a “theological” problem for Bible believers is nothing of the sort. I’d say it’s a problem for the theistic evolutionist, however. Not only does he not understand the Biblical position on why this is the case, he also explains why the Biblical position is correct, almost anyway. He does come up a little short, but he’s close. Stick with us. We’ll get to those 10 impossible questions soon enough.

This forum is meant to foster discussion and allow for differing viewpoints to be explored with equal and respectful consideration.  All comments are moderated and any foul language or threatening/abusive comments will not be approved.  Users who engage in threatening or abusive comments which are physically harmful in nature will be reported to the authorities.

by Logan Ames

I’m sure you remember when you were a child and your parents told you that you had to do something you didn’t want to do. If you were anything like me, you had no problem questioning their reason for making you do something you absolutely hated. You’d think that you have a right to understand their reasoning, and sometimes they’d decide to share it, especially once you were grown enough to understand. Other times, however, they’d simply say, “Because I said so.”

For me, that was usually the response I received when I wanted an explanation for having to eat certain foods or having to complete certain chores. As we got older, my brothers and I learned what it meant to negotiate but forgot that we didn’t really hold any of the bargaining chips. One time, my dad told my younger brother and I that we had to help him dig up a long strip of grass and dirt on the side of the house and replace the area with heavy stones. As we labored for hours, my brother suddenly said, “Hey dad, I forgot to tell you I charge $10 an hour." My dad almost immediately responded, “Well son, I forgot to tell you those three meals you had yesterday were $15 a piece!”

When you depend on someone for something, they usually get to determine the terms by which you will get it. Since children depend on their parents, the “because I said so” response is sufficient for almost any question. The parents can choose to provide more reasoning when they feel the child is mature enough to handle it, but otherwise it’s not necessary. When it comes to God, we must view him as the parent and ourselves as the dependent children. If he chooses to give us insight into his reasoning when he determines that would be helpful to us, we can be thankful. But if he chooses not to, we still must do what he says simply because he makes the rules. Why does he make the rules? I’d say it’s because there is something we need from him. If you think you need nothing from God, I intend to show you otherwise.

In Romans 13:8-10, Paul talks about the “debt” that we have to love one another and the fact that it is a debt that will never end. To whom do you believe this debt is owed? I can assure you that while the debt is to be paid directly to other people, it is owed to God alone. Truthfully, it’s common sense. When you are given something that requires payment, you owe the person who gave it to you. If you can’t pay what you owe, you are in debt. As believers, we know that God has given us the gift of salvation by faith and that our debt was paid by Jesus on the cross. But we must remember that our faith is not merely the kind that simply believes. As James says, “Faith without deeds is dead” (James 2:26). We are saved by faith alone, but the kind of faith that saves us is always accompanied by action. Therefore, we owe it to the Lord to continue loving one another until we are called home to be with him for all of eternity.

Let’s take a little bit of a closer look at what it means to love one another based on this week’s passage. In verse 9, Paul lists several of the laws that are part of the Ten Commandments and then says they are all summed up in the command, “Love your neighbor as yourself." Many believers will immediately point out that these words were spoken by Jesus in Matthew 22:39-40. But even Jesus was quoting them from the Old Testament. The original verse, Leviticus 19:18, actually gives us more context: “Do not seek revenge or bear a grudge against anyone among your people, but love your neighbor as yourself. I am the Lord." Wow! Now that’s a difficult debt to pay! It may have seemed easy when it was somewhat abstract or hypothetical, but now that we know where the verse comes from in the law, we actually have to love those who have hurt us. This might be where we would be those whiny children that would complain, “But why, God?” The answer is simply, “I am the Lord,” which is another way of saying, “Because I said so."

We must do as God commands because we are dependent on his mercy when what we truly deserve is his judgment. The apostle James also references the “love your neighbor as yourself” law in James 2:8. But later in that same passage, he declares, “Speak and act as those who are going to be judged by the law that gives freedom, because judgment without mercy will be shown to anyone who has not been merciful” (James 2:12-13). In other words, loving others means to bear with them and to show them mercy, which is the opposite of holding a grudge or seeking revenge. If we choose to ignore this command and do not pay this “outstanding debt,” then what we have waiting for us when this life is over is “judgment without mercy." Let me tell you, friends, that if there is one thing you don’t ever want to receive from the Lord, it is judgment WITHOUT mercy. I tremble at even the thought of it.

We can’t claim to be followers of Jesus and not love others by showing them mercy, even when they have hurt us deeply. That’s what sets us apart from everyone else. The rest of the world who doesn’t know Jesus is already facing judgment without mercy. But we have accepted the sacrifice made by Jesus for us and must not think we have a right to judge others for every wrongdoing they commit against us, when God no longer treats us that way. The next time you think about holding a grudge against someone or looking for revenge, maybe you should stop and think about the sins you have committed against the Lord even within that very day! Chances are that you’d have a pretty stiff penalty for them if you had to face “judgment without mercy." And that’s only for one day in your life!

Moses, inspired by the Lord, tells us in Leviticus what it means to love our neighbors. Jesus and his brother James remind us of the importance of this Old Testament law and how it impacts our behavior as Christians. The apostle Paul then tells us in this week’s passage that it is connected to the only debt that we should ever allow to remain outstanding. If you want to know why we have to show mercy and love even when it’s hard, the answer that should suffice is that God has said so. Take some time this week to think about who you have had a hard time showing mercy, and then ask God to remind you of your debt and change your perspective.

This forum is meant to foster discussion and allow for differing viewpoints to be explored with equal and respectful consideration.  All comments are moderated and any foul language or threatening/abusive comments will not be approved.  Users who engage in threatening or abusive comments which are physically harmful in nature will be reported to the authorities.

by Bill Seng

“Live as free people, but do not use your freedom as a cover-up for evil; live as God’s slaves.” ~1 Peter 2:16

A topic that is often times forgotten or horribly misrepresented is the story of Thanksgiving. For my next few posts, I am going to visit this topic. Each post will follow a chronological framework and will explain to us, as both Americans and as Christians, why the story of Thanksgiving is relevant today.

To understand the story of Thanksgiving, one needs to first understand why the Pilgrims fled from England. To understand why the Pilgrims fled from England, one must understand the concept of the establishment of a national religion.

It is no mistake that the first amendment of the United States Constitution protects religious liberty. It specifically reads: “Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the government for a redress of grievances.” The founders of the United States were all too familiar with how a powerful state-controlled church could be used as a force of oppression.

In the 16th century, King Henry VIII desired to have a son. He married Catherine of Aragon who would eventually only give him a daughter. He wanted the Pope Clement VII to grant him an annulment, which, to make a long story short, he refused. Henry desperately wanted to be legally unbound from his wife (divorced) so that he might marry someone who would birth him a son, so that his son might be the heir to the throne. He took action by separating England’s church from the Roman Catholic church. Instead of being led by the traditional monk-like man of the cloth, he conveniently declared himself head over the newly formed Church of England.

Protestantism and Catholicism were deemed illegal and were regarded no higher form of religion than witchcraft. This means that Protestants and Catholics (as well as witches, of course) could be executed for the crime of heresy. I am going to skip some of the details, but you probably know the next move of the Pilgrims. They packed up their bags and moved to, you guessed it, Ameri – uh, Holland? Yes Holland, where Protestants could practice their faith freely.

But while in Holland, they experienced some troubles that were previously unforeseen. Probably the most significant of their troubles was the dire poverty they faced. As immigrants they could only secure work that hardly paid enough to ensure their survival. Second, the Dutch culture did not embrace their deeply held convictions, and the children of the Pilgrims started to live lives that were not acceptable to a holy God. Third, and probably the most fascinating, is that the Pilgrims wanted to spread the Gospel message to the unreached parts of the world.

It should fascinate and inspire us that the initial motif for the Pilgrims’ pilgrimage to America was for the sake of spreading the Gospel. It is a shame that the first amendment is only invoked by politicians of our era whenever a nativity scene is erected, or it is being debated as to whether the 10 Commandments should be allowed to be displayed in classrooms, or if people should be allowed to say “Merry Christmas!” Religious liberty extends beyond our porch steps.

  Nationalized religion both kills and necessitates the need for evangelism. When religion is forced upon a group of people, it is either mockingly rejected or dreadfully obeyed. Some people might maintain a genuine faith in such a climate, but Europe, including Great Britain, is evidence that nationalized religion kills genuine faith. Government can’t get cars right, they can’t get healthcare right, and they can’t get church right. Why do we keep on expecting them to fix things? I digress.

We here in America need not fear preaching the Gospel openly. For one, the consequences for us doing so are not half as severe as what it is in other countries. Some people recently have forfeited their careers by taking stands on their faith. Some might say they were foolish to do so. I say, “Who am I to judge another man’s servant?” We do not have to be willing to participate in the same simple acts of faith that other people engage in, but we certainly should not condemn them. Not only that, we should be willing to step out on faith ourselves.

What ways might you be able to exercise your religious liberty? What is God calling you to do that might require faith? It is important to protect our religious liberties that are guaranteed by the Constitution, but it is even more important to exercise them.

For more information, check out this website, Monumental featuring Kirk Cameron, and Rush Revere and the Brave Pilgrims by Rush Limbaugh.

This forum is meant to foster discussion and allow for differing viewpoints to be explored with equal and respectful consideration.  All comments are moderated and any foul language or threatening/abusive comments will not be approved.  Users who engage in threatening or abusive comments which are physically harmful in nature will be reported to the authorities.

by Katie Erickson

“Let no debt remain outstanding, except the continuing debt to love one another, for whoever loves others has fulfilled the law. The commandments, ‘You shall not commit adultery,' 'You shall not murder,' 'You shall not steal,' 'You shall not covet,' and whatever other command there may be, are summed up in this one command: 'Love your neighbor as yourself.' Love does no harm to a neighbor. Therefore love is the fulfillment of the law.” (Romans 13:8-10)

When you were growing up, did you have a list of rules you had to follow? Make your bed. Don’t talk back. Eat your vegetables. Don’t run with scissors. While all those rules would have been established for your own good, you probably found them difficult to follow at some point. Wouldn’t it have been easier if there were only one rule you had to follow?

Here, the apostle Paul goes back to the subject of love that he had previously discussed in Romans 12:9-21. He brings up some of the laws that the people of Israel were given way back in Exodus 20. That passage contains what we call the Ten Commandments, but the Israelites actually had more than 600 laws that God required them to follow! Can you imagine having to follow all of those? Fortunately, all of the rules that we’re required to follow can be summed up in just one rule: Love your neighbor as yourself. As Paul tells us in verse 10, “Love does no harm to a neighbor. Therefore love is the fulfillment of the law.”

This passage helps those in the church in Rome who were Jews to link what they had grown up with to what was now going on. They would have know all those 600+ Old Testament laws, and lived by them for their entire lives if they were devout Jews. Now, however, Jesus has fulfilled the law through His love, so they only need to focus on loving their neighbors now! Sounds easy, right?

Not necessarily. Jesus Himself had shared this teaching, which you can read about in Matthew 22:34-40. We must love the Lord our God with everything that is in us and in every aspect of our lives, and we must love our neighbors as ourselves.

Love is not something you can just do once and you’re done. As Paul says in verse 8, it’s a debt that will never be fully repaid. We need to constantly live lives that show God’s love to ourselves and to one another. If we always show love to our neighbor and do no harm to then, we’ll automatically be following all of the other commandments that have been given.

We don’t need to memorize a list of rules, but only this one: love! Love God and love your neighbor; that’s all that really matters. How are you doing at that in your own life?

This forum is meant to foster discussion and allow for differing viewpoints to be explored with equal and respectful consideration.  All comments are moderated and any foul language or threatening/abusive comments will not be approved.  Users who engage in threatening or abusive comments which are physically harmful in nature will be reported to the authorities.

by Ami Samuels

2 Corinthians 5:17 says, “If anyone is in Christ, they are a new creation. The old is gone, the new has come.”

It has taken me a long time to say this phrase, “I’m glad you’re you and I’m happy to be me.” I used to spend so much time looking at what other people had in life. I found myself saying things like, “I wish I were funny like her,” or successful, or thin, or you fill in the blank.

I have found that so many of us spend so much time worrying about who we aren’t, that we miss who we are in Christ. I’ll say that again - so many of us spend so much time worrying about who we aren’t, that we MISS WHO WE ARE IN CHRIST!

All of that changed for me when I developed God Confidence. I describe God Confidence as being confident in the One who created me and gave me my talents and gifts. I may not be confident in me, but I can be confident in the one who created me.

In a talk I give called, “What to Do When the Glass Slipper Doesn’t Fit,” I share that it is important to understand who we are created to be. We need to understand our strengths and our weaknesses, and allow God to work through both.

It is so freeing to be who we are, to be who we are created to be, and to stop worrying about who we aren’t. Comparison steals our joy. Paul shares with us again in 2 Corinthians 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. God made him who had no sin to be sin for us, so that in him we might become the righteousness of God.”

Be the best you that you can be today.

This forum is meant to foster discussion and allow for differing viewpoints to be explored with equal and respectful consideration.  All comments are moderated and any foul language or threatening/abusive comments will not be approved.  Users who engage in threatening or abusive comments which are physically harmful in nature will be reported to the authorities.