Quote:
Originally Posted by Evangelical
To love your family is better than to hate your family. But unless you have Christ, to love or to hate is Christ-less, and of no avail. This is what Witness Lee means. Nothing wrong with natural, as in human, but natural things apart from Christ are bad. That is, if we love our family without Christ's love, it is just our own love, and is vain, superficial, natural, even selfish.
|
So are we saying that the love of the unsaved is simply vain and pointless?
Or are we saying that the love of even the saved who are not somehow qualified as being "in Christ" is also vain and pointless.
I really don't want this to seem as a kind of "going off" on Evangelical. Instead, this is yet another salvo at the thought that there is some "in Christ" or "not in Christ" problem for the Christian. Maybe there is a problem with people who are Christian (and therefore "in Christ") doing things that they think are right but are not. But where is the rationale that a Christian should not be doing what he knows should be done. To not do what they know has been commanded to be done?
Not talking about remaining ignorant and therefore doing wrong. But about knowing what is right and having any kind of thought that they might not be doing it "in Christ."
If the whole discussion is simply to make points against the unsaved, then why waste your breath?
But if the discussion is to nit-pick over who of Christ's followers are in the instant practicing some kind of "in Christ" thing — that is a whole different question.
I know that a certain person wrote a book on Practicing the Presence of God (if I am remembering the title correctly). At this point I really don't remember a lot about it as my reading was so many years ago. But I have been impressed lately that while there is a real ability to be so engaged in a prayerful attitude through much of what we do at all times in the day, I question whether the emphasis on such things it often at the expense of dismissing those who simply recognize that they are believers in, and followers of Christ, and therefore recognize times when they might have naturally done things in a less than righteous manner and instead decide to be righteous instead. They didn't pray about it. They didn't check whether their last time of prayer was recent enough that they might or might not be "in Christ" at that moment. (I don't believe there is such a time frame.)
I mean, isn't there any belief that the conscience speaking to us is as good as God speaking? They where is the cause to defer such action?
I mean, if there is no proximity of prayer, but just the decision to act differently, how much of the kind of thought that the action is "Christ-less," or not "in Christ" do different people have?
I think that in at least one place one of the NT writers essentially said that if you are still doing "X" you should stop it. I can't remember if it was Paul, or James, or someone else. And I can't remember what it was that was mentioned.
But it was a clear admonition to refuse the unrighteous way and instead do what is righteous. And sometimes we are happy to say that about stealing, adultery, or being alcoholic or taking drugs.
And we want the world to stop aborting babies, although for them to do that is Christ-less and therefore pointless (if we take this "in Christ" thing to its logical end).
Yet we suggest that there are actions toward righteousness and obedience that might not be "in Christ" with respect to a saved person. Doesn't that suggest that maybe they shouldn't yet try to be righteous?
Really?