Is love without correction real love?

The following comment is in response to Rev. Guillaume Smit’s blog entry here and the progamme broadcast on Sunday 4 October on “Kruis en Dwars” (Radio Sonder Grense).

Proverbs 15:10

There is severe discipline for him who forsakes God’s way; and he who hates reproof will die [physically, morally, and spiritually].

2 Timothy 3:16 – 4:4

Every Scripture is God-breathed (given by His inspiration) and profitable for instruction, for reproof and conviction of sin, for correction of error and discipline in obedience, [and] for training in righteousness (in holy living, in conformity to God’s will in thought, purpose, and action), So that the man of God may be complete and proficient, well fitted and thoroughly equipped for every good work. I CHARGE [you] in the presence of God and of Christ Jesus, Who is to judge the living and the dead, and by (in the light of) His coming and His kingdom: Herald and preach the Word! Keep your sense of urgency [stand by, be at hand and ready], whether the opportunity seems to be favorable or unfavorable. [Whether it is convenient or inconvenient, whether it is welcome or unwelcome, you as preacher of the Word are to show people in what way their lives are wrong.] And convince them, rebuking and correcting, warning and urging and encouraging them, being unflagging and inexhaustible in patience and teaching. For the time is coming when [people] will not tolerate (endure) sound and wholesome instruction, but, having ears itching [for something pleasing and gratifying], they will gather to themselves one teacher after another to a considerable number, chosen to satisfy their own liking and to foster the errors they hold, And will turn aside from hearing the truth and wander off into myths and man-made fictions. (Emphasis added)

One of the most infamous clarions of our post-modern pastors and shepherds is “Love one another regardless . . .” — regardless of how God’s Word is manhandled; regardless of how Jesus Christ is maligned; regardless of how the Christian faith is infiltrated by false apostles and teachers who mislead and lead the unsuspecting to the slaughterhouses; regardless of the proliferation of false doctrine in the church  . . . regardless. . . . regardless . . . regardless, ad infinitum. What kind of love is this? What should Christians do when they see their brothers and sisters heading for disaster when they are deliberately led astray by a bunch of wolves in sheep’s clothing? Should they lovingly and tenderly put their arms around them and say . . . ?: “My dear brother or sister, I love you dearly and would never hurt you in anyway. I respect your views and therefore am quite prepared to assist, encourage and even accompany you on your chosen spiritual journey.”

The unholy and unhealthy emphasis on this kind of love stems from an unholy and unhealthy aversion to biblical correction, reproof and exhortation. In fact, whosoever dares to correct, reprove and exhort the wayward Christian is immediately singled out as an unloving, uncompassionate and patronizing fundamentalist. I have often pointed out that true brotherly love cannot be separated from a love for and obedience to God’s Truth. John, the apostle of love, had no greater joy to see his spiritual children walk in truth (3 John 1:4). Shouldn’t he rather have been overjoyed to see them walk in love? No! there was no need for him to exhort them to walk in love because their walking in the truth was proof enough that they were already walking in love. When Jesus prayed His High Priestly prayer for his immediate disciples and all His disciples throughout the ages, He did not ask His Father to sanctify them in His love, but in His Truth (John 17:17), simply because sanctification in His Truth equals sanctification in His love —  and this is exactly why Jesus once said:

John 14:15 If you love Me, you will keep My commandments..
John 14:21 He who has My commandments and keeps them is the one who loves Me; and he who loves Me will be loved by My Father, and I will love him and will disclose Myself to him.”
John 15:10 If you keep My commandments, you will abide in My love; just as I have kept My Father’s.

Obedience to God’s Truth proves that you really love Him as well as His children. Despite these very serious warnings the enlightened emerging fraternity spurn absolute truth. Feigning humility they claim that no-one can know the truth and are inviting Christians to question their own belief. This is how Brian McLaren interprets love.

I don’t believe making disciples must equal making adherents to the Christian religion. It may be advisable in many (not all!) circumstances to help people become followers of Jesus and remain within their Buddhist, Hindu or Jewish contexts . . . . rather than resolving the paradox via pronouncements on the eternal destiny of people more convinced by or loyal to other religions than ours, we simply move on . . . To help Buddhists, Muslims, Christians, and everyone else experience life to the full in the way of Jesus (while learning it better myself), I would gladly become one of them whoever they are, to whatever degree I can, to embrace them, to join them, to enter into their world without judgment but with saving love as mine has been entered by the Lord. (Emphasis added)

Once again we should ask ourselves the question: What kind of love is this, a “love” that disobeys Christ and his command to go into all the world and make disciples of all the nations, and to teach them to obey everything He commanded? It not only amounts to a false love but also a false humility. Jesus Christ did not become one of us to embrace other religions (Buddhism, Islam, Judaism, Hinduism or whatever) or to show His solidarity with them by joining them and enter into their world without judgement. Indeed, the fact of the matter is that everyone (of whatever religious persuasion) who rejects His cross (the power and wisdom of God) as the only way unto salvation, is continually living under the wrath of God.

John 3:36 And he who believes in (has faith in, clings to, relies on) the Son has (now possesses) eternal life. But whoever disobeys (is unbelieving toward, refuses to trust in, disregards, is not subject to) the Son will never see (experience) life, but [instead] the wrath of God abides on him. [God's displeasure remains on him; His indignation hangs over him continually.]

Jesus also said: “If you abide in My word [hold fast to My teachings and live in accordance with them], you are truly My disciples (John 8:31). Those, like Brian McLaren and many other Emergent Church leaders, who assert that you can be a follower of Jesus without having to abandon your particular religion that denies Jesus’ deity, his virgin birth, his resurrection and ascension are flagrantly disobeying the One they claim to follow. What kind of love is this?

The most common reaction amongst post-modern preachers to Christians who believe that the Bible is the infallible, eternal and absolute truth of God and that anyone can know the truth, is usually ridiculed and derogatively branded as fundamentalists who think they are the keepers and defenders of the faith — and of God. Dr. James Kirkpatrick, residential pastor of the South East Pretoria DRC and Chairman of the “Komitee vir Leer en Aktuele Sake” has probably appointed himself to the elevated position of defender of the post-modern belief that no one can claim to know  the truth of God absolutely. He had the following to say on the programme “Kruis en Dwars” (Radio Sonder Grense, 04/10/2009).

Questionnaire: James, do you think the church is sufficiently guiding believers to be emotional and intelligent when their faith is involved?

James Kirkpatrick: You know, I rather think, to answer the question, it will depend on what the church teaches the people about God, what it teaches people about the relation between the church and . . . the world at large, because if you convey the message that we are called to sort of defend God; we must intervene when God is sort of  attacked, then people are going to have that kind of reaction to think that they are advocates; they must intervene in behalf of God. If you present people with another image of God who does not need it and who is bigger and does not need to be defended by people, then that kind of conduct will be unnecessary. When you also consider again how people look at the truth as an absolute thing . . . that they alone have [the right to it], then they are going to react with that kind of emotion, because they are right and must tell the world what the truth is. But if you make them understand that each one of us see in part [only], that we have our perspective and that one must communicate with others with a a cautious and honest attitude so that the Gospel should not be discredited, [their attitude would change].

The most disturbing and baffling thing about James Kirkpatrick’s lecture on his own absolute truth that no one can claim to know absolute truth, is that he claims to be a guardian of the Gospel of Jesus Christ and is duty bound not to bring it into discredit. Perhaps he might not know it, but the “best” way to discredit the Gospel of Jesus Christ is to suggest to the world that He was a liar when He said: “And ye shall know the truth, and the truth shall make you free” (John 8:32). Worse still is his suggestion that He lied when He said: “But when He, the Spirit of Truth (the Truth-giving Spirit) comes, He will guide you into all the Truth (the whole, full Truth). For He will not speak His own message [on His own authority]; but He will tell whatever He hears [from the Father; He will give the message that has been given to Him], and He will announce and declare to you the things that are to come [that will happen in the future]” (John 16:13). Who is the liar? — Jesus Christ who conquered death on the cross, was buried but never experienced decay in the grave, rose again from the dead and is now seated at the right hand of God the Father or a man who is going to die and whose body is going to see decay while it is ransacked and eaten up by maggots? Shocking . . .? Perhaps . . .! but I sincerely hope this gives you an idea of what the difference is between God and man who audaciously demands that no one can know absolute truth. No wonder Psalm 2 says: “He Who sits in the heavens laughs; the Lord has them in derision [and in supreme contempt He mocks them]”

Those of you who may still have some vinyl records will know what I’m talking about. The slightest scratch in its grooves causes the record to get stuck in a monotonous repetition of some words in a song. The post-modern song of 1 Corinthians 13: 9 sounds like this — “For we know in part” – “For we know in part” — “For we know in part.” They are so heavily stuck in this groove that they conveniently forget the above passages I quoted from Scripture to prove that anyone can know the truth and nothing but the truth.

In order to say that no-one can know absolute truth with conviction, James  Kirkpatrick must of necessity regard his own opinion that no one can know God’s truth absolutely as an unquestionably absolute truth. Should he however, out of sheer post-modern humility, not regard his own opinion as an absolute truth, he must of necessity admit there is a possibility that mankind can indeed know and understand God’s absolute truth because his own belief cannot absolutely disprove that one can know God’s truth absolutely. Should he however regard his own opinion as an absolute truth then he has merely replaced God’s absolute truth with his own absolute truth and that, to say the least, is arrogance and conceitedness at its very best.

What did Paul mean when he said: “Love never fails. But where there are prophecies, they will cease; where there are tongues, they will be stilled; where there is knowledge, it will pass away. For we know in part and we prophesy in part, but when perfection comes, the imperfect disappears.” (1 Corinthians 13:8-10). He could not possibly have meant that mankind can only partly know God’s truth and therefore no-one can claim to have a monopoly on His truth and neither can anyone correct others whose opinions, perspectives, beliefs and interpretations are equally valid and truthful. Had Paul meant to say that we can only partly know God’s truth, especially in regard to salvation and sanctification, he would have contradicted Jesus Christ who said; “ye shall know the truth, and the truth shall make you free” and ““But when He, the Spirit of Truth (the Truth-giving Spirit) comes, He will guide you into all the Truth (the whole, full Truth). For He will not speak His own message [on His own authority]; but He will tell whatever He hears [from the Father; He will give the message that has been given to Him], and He will announce and declare to you the things that are to come [that will happen in the future]” Paul simply compared the temporal means of conveying God’s truth, i.e. prophecy (preaching of the Gospel), tongues, and knowledge with the ultimate goal which is godly or divine love (agapao). Prophecy (the preaching of the Gospel), tongues and knowledge are merely temporal means to convey God’s truth, especially with regard to His salvation and sanctification of repentant sinners. These are all necessary parts of our temporal and broken world. Obviously these temporal means of conveying God’s truth will no longer be necessary in God’s eternal heavenly home. There only one thing will remain — God’s magnanimous divine love.

Another often repeated cliché used against fundamentalists is “There’s no need to defend God. He can defend Himself.” Apart from the fact that it is a silly and naive statement, it demonstrates an ignorance of biblical truth with regard to the command that Christians should earnestly contend for the faith that was once delivered unto the saints (Jude 1:3). How are Christians supposed to contend for their faith? Well, read again the passage from 2 Timothy 3:16 – 4:4 I quoted to you in the beginning of my comment.