Post by Zac Loh on Sept 14, 2009 15:00:12 GMT -5
How do we balance between truth and practicality? Do we neglect, set aside, certain part of the truth …because we don’t understand the practicality of it? Do we bend, adjust, compromise, mix-and-match, the truth …for the sake of practicality? Is the whole complete truth of God …can be practically practiced?
Do we follow Dry Law, or do we follow Divine Love? Do we give by a Ritualistic Rule which we adopt, or do we give by a Real Relationship with God?
The Second Greatest Commandment
Jesus answered him, “The first of all the commandments is: ‘Hear, O Israel, the LORD our God, the LORD is one. And you shall love the LORD your God with all your heart, with all your soul, with all your mind, and with all your strength.’ This is the first commandment. And the second, like it, is this: ‘You shall love your neighbor as yourself.’ There is no other commandment greater than these.” (Mark 12:29-31)
This is how it works: the love of God will be poured into us (Romans 5:5) after we have truly loved God. This means the second greatest commandment can be fulfilled after we have fulfilled the first greatest commandment. We will love ourselves and our neighbors with God’s own divine love.
Human originated love has its defects and it is limited.
The Self-Justifying Legalist
And behold, a certain lawyer stood up and tested Him, saying, “Teacher, what shall I do to inherit eternal life?” He said to him, “What is written in the law? What is your reading of it?” So he answered and said, “ ‘You shall love the LORD your God with all your heart, with all your soul, with all your strength, and with all your mind,’ and ‘your neighbor as yourself.’” And He said to him, “You have answered rightly; do this and you will live.” But he, wanting to justify himself, said to Jesus, “And who is my neighbor?” Then Jesus answered and said: “A certain man went down from Jerusalem to Jericho, and fell among thieves, who stripped him of his clothing, wounded him, and departed, leaving him half dead. Now by chance a certain priest came down that road. And when he saw him, he passed by on the other side. Likewise a Levite, when he arrived at the place, came and looked, and passed by on the other side. But a certain Samaritan, as he journeyed, came where he was. And when he saw him, he had compassion. So he went to him and bandaged his wounds, pouring on oil and wine; and he set him on his own animal, brought him to an inn, and took care of him. On the next day, when he departed, he took out two denarii, gave them to the innkeeper, and said to him, ‘Take care of him; and whatever more you spend, when I come again, I will repay you.’ So which of these three do you think was neighbor to him who fell among the thieves?” And he said, “He who showed mercy on him.” Then Jesus said to him, “Go and do likewise.” (Luke 10:25-37)
The protagonist, of course, was the Good Samaritan. Not a Jew. A Samaritan was not totally, legally, right to the adherents of `full fledge’ Judaism. As such, Jews had no dealings with the Samaritans (John 4:9).
There are legalists who will bend and adjust the truth to suit their own purpose, for their self-interest. It is the same with some modern lawyers today. But this legalist in the Bible was not thoroughly bad; he was a seeker of the truth, but only to a certain limit.
He justified the truth because he couldn’t comprehend all of the practicality. “How do I practice this?”
According to James M. Freeman (his book `Manners & Customs Of The Bible’): “The Jews gave a very narrow definition of the word “neighbor.” The rabbins interpreted it to mean only those who were of the Jewish people. The Gentiles were not considered neighbors.”
Isn’t it true, today, that some of us are of the same vein? We only give to our own, only to those we consider is a part of us, only to those we feel akin to. We have been limited.
So Jesus’ parable was pure revolutionary, a slap to the face for the proud Jew: the Good Samaritan who the Jews treated as outsiders, became a better giver because he had an unlimited view.
The Good Samaritan exemplified what Jesus meant by “loving your neighbor as yourself”.
Divine love breaks every human barrier. Divine love eliminates human boundaries. Divine love has got no limits. Divine love makes the need for emotional attachment and personal identification unnecessary; before we give.
And though I bestow all my goods to feed the poor, and though I give my body to be burned, but have not love, it profits me nothing. (1 Corinthians 13:3)
Giving without love has no value. When not motivated by love, our giving means nothing.
The Hyper Religious
The religious do give, only if it is within their purview. The priest and the Levite passed by on the other side of the road. Religious considerations?
Has our religious giving blinded us to the need in front of us?
Do we follow Dry Law, or do we follow Divine Love? Do we give by a Ritualistic Rule which we adopt, or do we give by a Real Relationship with God?
The Second Greatest Commandment
Jesus answered him, “The first of all the commandments is: ‘Hear, O Israel, the LORD our God, the LORD is one. And you shall love the LORD your God with all your heart, with all your soul, with all your mind, and with all your strength.’ This is the first commandment. And the second, like it, is this: ‘You shall love your neighbor as yourself.’ There is no other commandment greater than these.” (Mark 12:29-31)
This is how it works: the love of God will be poured into us (Romans 5:5) after we have truly loved God. This means the second greatest commandment can be fulfilled after we have fulfilled the first greatest commandment. We will love ourselves and our neighbors with God’s own divine love.
Human originated love has its defects and it is limited.
The Self-Justifying Legalist
And behold, a certain lawyer stood up and tested Him, saying, “Teacher, what shall I do to inherit eternal life?” He said to him, “What is written in the law? What is your reading of it?” So he answered and said, “ ‘You shall love the LORD your God with all your heart, with all your soul, with all your strength, and with all your mind,’ and ‘your neighbor as yourself.’” And He said to him, “You have answered rightly; do this and you will live.” But he, wanting to justify himself, said to Jesus, “And who is my neighbor?” Then Jesus answered and said: “A certain man went down from Jerusalem to Jericho, and fell among thieves, who stripped him of his clothing, wounded him, and departed, leaving him half dead. Now by chance a certain priest came down that road. And when he saw him, he passed by on the other side. Likewise a Levite, when he arrived at the place, came and looked, and passed by on the other side. But a certain Samaritan, as he journeyed, came where he was. And when he saw him, he had compassion. So he went to him and bandaged his wounds, pouring on oil and wine; and he set him on his own animal, brought him to an inn, and took care of him. On the next day, when he departed, he took out two denarii, gave them to the innkeeper, and said to him, ‘Take care of him; and whatever more you spend, when I come again, I will repay you.’ So which of these three do you think was neighbor to him who fell among the thieves?” And he said, “He who showed mercy on him.” Then Jesus said to him, “Go and do likewise.” (Luke 10:25-37)
The protagonist, of course, was the Good Samaritan. Not a Jew. A Samaritan was not totally, legally, right to the adherents of `full fledge’ Judaism. As such, Jews had no dealings with the Samaritans (John 4:9).
There are legalists who will bend and adjust the truth to suit their own purpose, for their self-interest. It is the same with some modern lawyers today. But this legalist in the Bible was not thoroughly bad; he was a seeker of the truth, but only to a certain limit.
He justified the truth because he couldn’t comprehend all of the practicality. “How do I practice this?”
According to James M. Freeman (his book `Manners & Customs Of The Bible’): “The Jews gave a very narrow definition of the word “neighbor.” The rabbins interpreted it to mean only those who were of the Jewish people. The Gentiles were not considered neighbors.”
Isn’t it true, today, that some of us are of the same vein? We only give to our own, only to those we consider is a part of us, only to those we feel akin to. We have been limited.
So Jesus’ parable was pure revolutionary, a slap to the face for the proud Jew: the Good Samaritan who the Jews treated as outsiders, became a better giver because he had an unlimited view.
The Good Samaritan exemplified what Jesus meant by “loving your neighbor as yourself”.
Divine love breaks every human barrier. Divine love eliminates human boundaries. Divine love has got no limits. Divine love makes the need for emotional attachment and personal identification unnecessary; before we give.
And though I bestow all my goods to feed the poor, and though I give my body to be burned, but have not love, it profits me nothing. (1 Corinthians 13:3)
Giving without love has no value. When not motivated by love, our giving means nothing.
The Hyper Religious
The religious do give, only if it is within their purview. The priest and the Levite passed by on the other side of the road. Religious considerations?
Some believe that the priest and Levite might have had some justification for their actions. After all, as temple officials they were especially concerned about ceremonial cleanness. The Law stated that the high priest "must not enter a place where there is a dead body. He must not make himself unclean, even for his father or mother" (Leviticus 21:11). Even a regular priest "will also be unclean if he touches something defiled by a corpse" (Leviticus 22:4; Ezekiel 24:25). What if the man lying beaten by the side of the road were dead? The man may not have been stirring. One can't be too careful, you know.
[an excerpt from JesusWalk at www.jesuswalk.com/lessons/10_25-37.htm]
[an excerpt from JesusWalk at www.jesuswalk.com/lessons/10_25-37.htm]
Has our religious giving blinded us to the need in front of us?