PiñaBlog Bits and Pieces of Piña

Sounds great! Not to get all pentocostal on you, but how does the Holy Spirit play a role?

Posted by matt on 20 October 2006 @ 4am

I have been wondering the same thing for the past week. understanding why Loving people and God is such a big deal. now i realize that for me to be whole and in my element i have to be myslef which is loving God as well as his people. i know that sounds like elementry christianity but it just works for me. ive tried so hard to control all aspects of my life and not let God control them and now i see that i can lead myself and need help. Love God and Love people is really the only thing i know how to do, and when i do that i feel like ive moved moutains.

Posted by Mar on 20 October 2006 @ 4am

Matt: Thanks. I believe the Holy Spirit is the means by which God chooses to speak to us most often. As lovers of God, I believe that in our obedience, we become better at hearing him speak. I don’t think the Holy Spirit is a magic trick, or even a convenient tool; I think it is God, asking us to listen and obey.

Posted by Cory on 20 October 2006 @ 6am

The Holy Spirit is also good at parties.

Posted by Travis on 20 October 2006 @ 7am

a while ago I heard Cosby talk about how by loving people we are showing love to God because we are following his commands. To quote a cheesy 70’s song “for they will know we are christians by our love”. This idea does resonate with me. I was talking to a prof. at whitworth,Karen Heller about her own “dark night of the soul” and what she took with her during it and after. Three things she said, Faith, Hope, and love. Perhaps this will be added into my working definition of being a Christian. It must contain these three things. Faith in the Lord Jesus Christ, Hope of his return and eternity with him, and love first for him and then for his people. I think I might be getting closer. Any thoughts on this anyone?

Posted by Janice Line on 20 October 2006 @ 10am

I think your hit on something very good here with “love God, love people.” However, I would caution most people at this point. When Jesus spoke these words to his audience, they were very literate regarding their understanding of the Jewish faith and the OT scriptures. They understood that Jesus was making an addition to the Shema (Hear Oh Israel, the Lord our God is one. Love the Lord your God with all your heart and with all your soul and with all your strength” (Deuteronomy 6:4ff). Such an understanding is so very important in order for us to understand what it means to love. Love has so many connotations in our world. Thus, we need to have a lense to look through in order to understand love properly. One of those lenses is the OT Shema. The second lense is the cross– which lets us know that love demands our very lives… perhaps even our deaths. Our pathway of love will lead to persecution.

Posted by Fresh Dirt on 20 October 2006 @ 10am

Thanks. This is by no means exhaustive. Anyone want to write about love now?
I’m tired.

Posted by Cory on 20 October 2006 @ 2pm

I’ll throw in my thoughts on love because they’re probably slightly different. What do you guys think about this? “Reconciling to God all things, whether on earth or in heaven, making peace by the blood of his cross.”

Posted by James (orr, not one of my best friends, Lyons, bc we're always worried about getting confused on blogs) on 21 October 2006 @ 8am

James, the only problem I have with that is that I have to sort through the theology (as true as it is) to figure out what I’m really supposed to do.

I don’t say that to contradict or diminish your comment, I just wonder if we can describe in a less theologically technical way.

Posted by Cory on 21 October 2006 @ 8am

I think that’s why I like it, but I’m a conceptual thinker. I stole it from Col 1:21 (21, I think).

Posted by James (orr, not one of my best friends, Lyons, bc we're always worried about getting confused on blogs) on 21 October 2006 @ 10am

Cory, I appreciate the sentiment you express in your most recent comment. I think you and I probably think sort of differently, because I have a lot of affinity for James’ comment. If “love” is expressed in a way that has conceptual and theological import, then I feel as though I can take that and really DO something with it: I can apply it to all areas of my life, I can analyze various habits and practices that I have and perhaps strengthen or discard some, I can use that as a jumping-off point for further thought and action, etc. A lot of times when people talk about various notions (e.g., love) in a way that is resistant to theological and conceptual expression, I find myself listening uninspired to what seem like tired phrases that I’ve heard before and with which I can’t really do much. A lot of times I feel sort of paralyzed by it.

This isn’t to say, of course, that my sort of thinking is inferior to yours, or anything of the sort. It’s just to chime in to the conversation in what I hope is an interesting and somewhat productive way.

Posted by Josh K on 21 October 2006 @ 8pm

Thanks, Josh. I don’t mean to say either you or James are wrong. In fact I think that James’ statement is fantastic, and I can understand how you would want to take something like that as a measuring stick for your actions.

I think I’m looking for something a little more layman’s (for me).

Posted by Cory on 22 October 2006 @ 8am

Right-o.

I like when you post about stuff like this.

Posted by Josh K on 22 October 2006 @ 1pm

Thanks guys. It’s cool to have one of my ideas supported :)

Josh, I bet our way of thinking is fairly similar. I’m formed by these concepts, and they flesh themselves out naturally as they become more and more ingrained.

The main thing I get out of expressing it that way is that we’re not loving by reconciling someone from hunger, emotional destruction, less obviously horrible things, etc. We’re loving by reconciling them to God. The delivery from those things isn’t the act of love, the delivery to God is. That’s important to me. By all means is the delivery from those things also very important to me because lets not forget that very big part of Jesus’ personality. However I don’t always see Jesus doing that. Sometimes He doesn’t seem to get people a home or job or proper medical care as much as He enables them to do so. But He always reconciles to Himself before all else.

Do you guys see that? Do you see it differently?

Posted by James (orr, not one of my best friends, Lyons, bc we're always worried about getting confused on blogs) on 22 October 2006 @ 3pm

I tend to see faith as a pretty wholistic endevor. What I mean by that is that we as believers need not only tell people about Christianity, but support it with actions that will demostrate this love affair, I have seen, and experienced in my pre-Christian life the effects (usually negative in my experience) of just preaching to/at people. We must rather come along side them, where ever they may be, and help them in whatever way we can–not saying the action is what is most important-it is not, but I am saying that the actions will make the theology/faith part relevant, and the person being ministered to will actually hear it, rather than simply letting it in one ear and out the other.
I guess in my faith (and this coming from a student of medicine who plans to do some missions to third world countries) we cannot preach that God is good to people, and that He will provide, but must preach and provide if we are able, for simply preaching to a starving person will do no good, they won’t listen. But at the same time, enabling people to get to a place where they can do more for themselves is great as well, for then they are not reliant on others forever. I believe that actions must come along side faith, be in response to faith and what Jesus has done for us.
Just thought I would throw in my two cents.

Posted by b-rich on 23 October 2006 @ 11am