Question: Does God Love Us Just the way we are?

[Mark Metcalfe]

We're more involved in cultural war; the music program is a mix and has given
way to other issues such as purpose, direction, and focus. I say that we're
involved in a cultural war because I believe that our culture is applying
pressure on the purpose, direction, and focus of the church.

The phrase "God loves you just the way you are" typifies the culture clash,
I think. It sounds nice, but it is not true. "God loves you" is true... but
has come into this world to change you and give you new life. This is
a gospel message that is being lost - that we are to be changed; the
culture today adds God to their lives without changing life. The gospel
turns things around; (that is the definition of repentence).

Just as I am without one plea but that Thy blood was shed for me
and that Thou bidst me come to Thee! O Lamb of God I come!

We want Jesus to walk with us, when it is Jesus who calls us to
walk with Him! This is the great war of our church today.

Mark

[Hans Deventer]

The phrase "God loves you just the way you are" typifies the culture clash, I think. It sounds nice, but it is not true. "God loves you" is true... but has come into this world to change you and give you new life. This is a gospel message that is being lost - that we are to be changed; the culture today adds God to their lives without changing life. The gospel turns things around; (that is the definition of repentence).


Although we are very close, I have to disagree. If only for one word: "but".

"God loves you" is true. Yes. "He loves you just the way you are" is also true. AND because of that, He wants you to become who you are meant to be! BECAUSE He loves you as you are, He came to give us new life. That is not a "but", as if it would diminish the first clause ("God loves you"). It is an "and", or perhaps better, a "moreover". His love for me, "Just As I Am", prompted Him to not let me remain "Just As I Am".

Perhaps we are saying the same thing. It's just that I hate the phrase "God is love BUT...." and then you can fill in whatever you like. No, "God is love" period. I believe everything else, His holiness, righteousness etc etc etc is ultimately an expression of His love.

[Mark Metcalfe]

Although we are very close, I have to disagree. If only for one word: "but".

"God loves you" is true. Yes. "He loves you just the way you are" is also true. AND because of that, He wants you to become who you are meant to be! BECAUSE He loves you as you are, He came to give us new life. That is not a "but", as if it would diminish the first clause ("God loves you"). It is an "and", or perhaps better, a "moreover". His love for me, "Just As I Am", prompted Him to not let me remain "Just As I Am".

Perhaps we are saying the same thing. It's just that I hate the phrase "God is love BUT...." and then you can fill in whatever you like. No, "God is love" period. I believe everything else, His holiness, righteousness etc etc etc is ultimately an expression of His love.

I edited the conjunction from and to but; I thought it was more semantically
correct but iI do not think it should detract from the point that God calls us
FROM what and who we are TO what and who we should be.

So to carry the semantic discussion one more step: God does not love us
just the way we are; He loves us (period) - I agree with you that because
of His love, He calls us out of the way we are so that we can be clean
in His presence. His love will not tolerate sin in His presence such that
we can choose to remain in our squalor.

Mark

[Belinda Y. Edwards]

The phrase "God loves you just the way you are" typifies the culture clash,
I think. It sounds nice, but it is not true. "God loves you" is true... but
has come into this world to change you and give you new life. This is
a gospel message that is being lost - that we are to be changed; the
culture today adds God to their lives without changing life. The gospel
turns things around; (that is the definition of repentence).
Mark
Well said !!!!!

There is a big wall up against change and they will back off at the point where change is needful to move forward. They like the comfort zone of just being loved and accepted by God.

This is where the second prong of His purpose on the cross comes to Light. He came not to just give salvation but to heal us from all our iniquities/sins/diseases - - -He came to heal - -and we have such little faith to even speak it. We have such little faith to live it. We have such little understanding.

Seek and ye shall know....who takes time to seek?

[Hans Deventer]

I edited the conjunction from and to but; I thought it was more semantically correct but iI do not think it should detract from the point that God calls us FROM what and who we are TO what and who we should be.

And I wanted to point out that we don't have to become someone else for God to love us. :basic01


So to carry the semantic discussion one more step: God does not love us
just the way we are; He loves us (period)

Mmm. Can we agree on the following?

Romans 5:8 "But God demonstrates his own love for us in this: While we were still sinners, Christ died for us."

That is what I mean. It is emphatically a love for sinners.

You know, if folks don't want to change, they don't even remotely understand God's love either. You can't be really aware of God's love for you, and not want to be perfect in His eyes. But you can never reach that unless you realize that God already loves you as a sinner.

Perhaps we are circling around the same thing, just coming from different corners.

[Mark Metcalfe]

And I wanted to point out that we don't have to become someone else for God to love us. :basic01



Mmm. Can we agree on the following?

Romans 5:8 "But God demonstrates his own love for us in this: While we were still sinners, Christ died for us."

That is what I mean. It is emphatically a love for sinners.

You know, if folks don't want to change, they don't even remotely understand God's love either. You can't be really aware of God's love for you, and not want to be perfect in His eyes. But you can never reach that unless you realize that God already loves you as a sinner.

Perhaps we are circling around the same thing, just coming from different corners.

Yes we are circling. If I may... God loves us while we were still sinners. It does not say that God loves us as a sinner. He wants
to separate us from the sin! That is the part of us that He loves!

MM

[Mark Metcalfe]

P.S. You might want to move this from the music war discussion.
Title suggestion: "Does God love you just the way you are?"

[Marsha Lynn]

P.S. You might want to move this from the music war discussion.
Title suggestion: "Does God love you just the way you are?"

If it's set up as a poll, I'll vote with Hans. :)

I understand your frustration with people seeing God as a kindly old gentleman who pats us on the head and says things like, "Well, boys will be boys," without holding us accountable for our actions.

On the other hand, we have to develop our relationship with God starting from where we are. If we see the holy God as unable to tolerate the sight of sin, then we, as sinners, have no hope of enjoying fellowship with him until we somehow become more acceptable in his sight, something that is beyond possibility in our own strength.

In my opinion, a frowning God is as damaging to the gospel of transformation as an overly-benevolent God. It's as I comprehend the depth of love God has for me today that I want to be even more pleasing in his sight tomorrow.

When I think about people who are involved in the church but seem to be slow to embrace the values of the Kingdom, I see a need, not to persuade them that their lifestyle is abhorrent to God but to persuade them that the benefits of close relationship with God are worth the hard work of allowing themselves to be transformed. Rather than painting the darkness darker, we need to paint the light brighter and invite them into it.

Just some thoughts along this path of digression.

Marsha

[Mark Metcalfe]

If it's set up as a poll, I'll vote with Hans. :)

I understand your frustration with people seeing God as a kindly old gentleman who pats us on the head and says things like, "Well, boys will be boys," without holding us accountable for our actions.

On the other hand, we have to develop our relationship with God starting from where we are. If we see the holy God as unable to tolerate the sight of sin, then we, as sinners, have no hope of enjoying fellowship with him until we somehow become more acceptable in his sight, something that is beyond possibility in our own strength.

In my opinion, a frowning God is as damaging to the gospel of transformation as an overly-benevolent God. It's as I comprehend the depth of love God has for me today that I want to be even more pleasing in his sight tomorrow.

When I think about people who are involved in the church but seem to be slow to embrace the values of the Kingdom, I see a need, not to persuade them that their lifestyle is abhorrent to God but to persuade them that the benefits of close relationship with God are worth the hard work of allowing themselves to be transformed. Rather than painting the darkness darker, we need to paint the light brighter and invite them into it.

Just some thoughts along this path of digression.

Marsha

There is an old expression that says to "hate the sin and love the sinner."
Perhaps this expression has become so commonplace as to be rendered
meaningless. Make no mistake: God loves the sinner. A sinner is a
person that sins. Making a distinction between person and act is key
to parsing the phrase, "God loves us just the way we are."

You have a point and correctly point out the rub: God winking at
sin, which I believe the phrase sometimes connotes (hence this diversion
and the reason why I want to trim the phrase to "God loves us").

But you lead to a more interesting question, I think:

What is the gospel message?
And is it different today from 50 years ago?

Mark

[Belinda Y. Edwards]

i think that the war regarding love has a double side. i agree with one side, i disagree with the other.

i think that it comes down to in theological terms is salvation vs. sanctification. Salvation is the acceptance of love within our lives and sanctification is allowing the love to control our lives. To many times we want love but don't want the accountability or effect of love in our lives.

Eg. a lady comes to us with a cocain habit. Love accepts her just as she is and she doesn't have to clean up first to accept that love. But, grace isn't a gift that will continue to cover the habit without there being some steps and desires to conform away from the habit.

i never did cocain - but i have other *cocains* in my life.

Moving to allow His love to control us.

[Gina Stevenson]

Marsha: "In my opinion, a frowning God is as damaging to the gospel of transformation as an overly-benevolent God. It's as I comprehend the depth of love God has for me today that I want to be even more pleasing in his sight tomorrow."

Definitely, Marsha! Many have painted God in just this way ... where the "fear" we're to have of him is of being trampled, because he's just waiting to say: "Aha! Gotcha! Caught ya sinning!" as tho' he delights in punishment. That is not God.

NOW, Mark, since you quoted part of a song ... "Just as I Am" ... let's continue in that song to where it goes on to explain that while he accepts us as we are, he doesn't expect us to remain that way, but is wanting to help us become what he knows too well we can be:

"Just as I am and waiting not ... to rid my soul of one dark blot ...
To thee whose blood can cleanse each spot ..."

Actually, this suggests what we are to do, too ... "waiting not" on availing ourselves of his blood that "can cleanse each spot."

Also, since mention of "hate the sin but love the sinner" was bro't up, perhaps I'll have to see if I can recall the words to a certain song that speaks to that issue, too [if not, I'll have to look for it].

edit: goodness! the things our fingers do while our mind is doing something else!
had to come back to change what I meant as "availing" but to which my
fingers had added "-able" rather than "-ing." ;)

[Marsha Lynn]

There is an old expression that says to "hate the sin and love the sinner."

Ah... there are many old expressions that are not necessarily either biblical or true. ("God helps them as helps themselves" comes to mind.) I've heard the phrase you quote many times but I don't recall ever hearing it from the lips of someone actively hanging out and forming healthy friendships with those caught in the depths of sin simply because they valued those people as people. That doesn't mean it's not true, but there may be better ways to express the truth contained in it.

Make no mistake: God loves the sinner. A sinner is a person that sins. Making a distinction between person and act is key to parsing the phrase, "God loves us just the way we are."

So is it less true if we make that distinction? God DOES love us just the way we are, even while we are still sinners. That doesn't mean that He's winking at the sin. It means that He sees past the sin to who and what we really are. The fact that people rest in that phrase rather than pursuing relationship with a holy God through transformation doesn't mean that the phrase is wrong. The problem lies elsewhere.

But you lead to a more interesting question, I think:

What is the gospel message?
And is it different today from 50 years ago?

What? Another topic twist?

OK, let's see, the gospel in a nutshell...

God loves you (here, today, as you are, because he sees past all the masks and facades and baggage and sin that others see as part of your identity and looks into your very core of cores and finds value in who and what you are) and invites you into relationship with himself. He loves you so much that he sent his only Son to open the door to such a relationship. The possibilities of what you can become as a result of that relationship are absolutely astounding and limitless. All you need to do is accept that invitation knowing that it will cost you nothing and yet everything. You will never regret that decision.

I'm not 50 years old yet. You'll have to tell me if that's different than the gospel message from 50 years ago. :p

Another question comes up with my nutshell statement above: Is sin part of who and what we are? Can we truly separate the sin from the sinner? Does God see the image of himself in the sinner beyond the sin? Can we?

Marsha

[Gina Stevenson]

1) When I see a brother [or sister] who's fallen by the way,
Do I say, "How awful!" then quickly run away to ...
Find myself a list'ning ear, or do I feel his pain ...
And breathe his name to Jesus, so that he/she might be reclaimed?

2) forgot!

3) You may be the only Jesus some will ever know.
Will you draw others to him, or will they want to go ...
As far away as they can go, because you do not show
That the only life that's worth the while is with Jesus in control?

CHO: Hate the sin but love the sinner, don't treat him with contempt,
For we're to show them Jesus' love, and never to attempt ...
To put him/her down before others ...
Think we're much better than they.
All our righteousness is as filthy rags,
It's by God's mercy we are saved to day!

[copyrighted, GG]

[edit: changed one word that was wrong]

[Marsha Lynn]

i think that the war regarding love has a double side. i agree with one side, i disagree with the other.

i think that it comes down to in theological terms is salvation vs. sanctification. Salvation is the acceptance of love within our lives and sanctification is allowing the love to control our lives. To many times we want love but don't want the accountability or effect of love in our lives.

But the question isn't the pattern of our response to God's love but whether He loves us the way we are today. Does God still love us even if we continue to live a sinful lifestyle while claiming to know him as Lord? If it were your child with the drug problem would there come a point where you would no longer love him/her? Wouldn't you always yearn for that child to come home and pray that his/her return would be today? Would your love fade away as the days went on with no sign of change? Would broken promises and lies end that love? You might have to resort to measures of "tough love" but wouldn't you still love the fragile and beautiful person you knew lay beyond the sunken cheeks and the drug-affected behavior? And even if the answer is that you would eventually give up on the child and erase him/her from your life and thoughts, is that the type of love God has for us?

I stand by my statement. God sees and knows the depth of every heart, and He values supremely each of us as we are today. He longs to transform us and free us from the sin that cripples us. That sin does not make him love us any less.

However, it's probably time to concede that glibly saying, "God loves you just the way you are" without clarifying the object of that love (the unique spark hidden within each individual) can indeed convey the message that He accepts our weaknesses as part of who we are and has no further aspirations for us.

I'll lay down my arms (or laptop as the case may be) and let someone else take it from here.

Marsha

[Mark Metcalfe]

But the question isn't ...

However, it's probably time to concede that glibly saying, "God loves you just the way you are" without clarifying the object of that love (the unique spark hidden within each individual) can indeed convey the message that He accepts our weaknesses as part of who we are and has no further aspirations for us.


Actually, this was my original point. The phrase is inadequate to express
all the things we've just spent clarifying. We agree that God loves the
sinner - even the sinner who remains in sin - his love extends that far
and farther. But the phrase is too "glib" and too (can I say?) dangerous
to use on it own.

Mark

P.S. I still think the mods ought to redirect our notes so that the note
can talk about music wars. My apologies for pulling us to a tangent.

[G R 'Scott' Cundiff]

This thread is created out of posts done to another thread -- and moved here to create a thread where this particular discussion can continue while allowing people to participate in the original thread.

[Hans Deventer]

Yes we are circling. If I may... God loves us while we were still sinners. It does not say that God loves us as a sinner. He wants to separate us from the sin! That is the part of us that He loves!

Oh dear. We're not there yet. I think Marsha answered quite well about God loving us as sinners, I'll just second that.
Yes, He most certainly wants to separate us from the sin. Agreed. Though I would rather phrase it as, "He wants to fill us with His love". And we all know that "love is the fulfillment of the law". So where there is love, there is no sin left.

I don't think we really differ on the gospel. Perhaps we might want to explore the definition of sin. I really like Roland Hearn's description:

Sin is the activity of our defense mechanisms acting contrary to love for God, others or ourselves, with love being the ultimate expression of worth. Sin is the dysfunctional expression of our sense of worthlessness. It always has an individual’s distorted world view with a distorted sense of self at its core. It is motivated by a desperate attempt to find self-worth, to find love; or alternatively it is an attempt to protect from the conviction of worthlessness or the hopelessness of failing to find love.

Now clearly God wants to separate us from this, but that is not so much the taking away, as it is making Himself the center of our being, the foundation of our life, the source of our value, our self worth. As Paul wrote, "God has poured out his love into our hearts by the Holy Spirit, whom he has given us."

[Billy Cox]

"Jesus loves you...but then again, he loves everybody."

(you can order the shirt online at larknews.com (http://www.larknews.com)

[Mark Metcalfe]

Now clearly God wants to separate us from this, but that is not so much the taking away, as it is making Himself the center of our being, the foundation of our life, the source of our value, our self worth. As Paul wrote, "God has poured out his love into our hearts by the Holy Spirit, whom he has given us."

A teacher poured a liquid into an empty jar. He demonstrated that the
jar was indeed not empty but full of air, and that as the liquid filled
the jar, it displaced the air.

It is not that it is not so much the taking away... it is that both the
filling and the taking are performed simultaneously.

Saved from... Saved to...

Mark

[Mark Metcalfe]

But you lead to a more interesting question, I think:

What is the gospel message?
And is it different today from 50 years ago?

Mark

I started a thread on this in the general discussion forum.
I hope that our preachers among us (called to preach) reply.
It is important to me because we can learn from each
other several ways to effectively express the gospel message,
and to know that the ministers of the gospel know how to
communicate that message.

Mark

[Bruce Carriker]

I've read this thread twice, trying to figure out what it is we're talking about. The heading reads, "Does God love you just the way you are?"

Answer: Of course he does. Next question.

[Bruce Carriker]

Of course then you can get into a major discussion of what it means to say that God loves us just the way we are. What are the salvific implications, if any, in that statement. I don't think there are any. God can love us just the way we are, without inviting us into his heaven just the way we are. It's not the same thing.

[G R 'Scott' Cundiff]

I've read this thread twice, trying to figure out what it is we're talking about. The heading reads, "Does God love you just the way you are?"

Answer: Of course he does. Next question.

I wonder why the put down. If you don't find the discussion interesting, or if you think it is too shallow for you, why post a flippant reply? Why not just let it go and let those who want to discuss it do so without putting them down.

[BobHunt]

I have to agree with Marsha in one respect. In my earlier days, all I heard was fire and brimstone preaching, it seemed as if I should get salvation as "fire insurance" and all that was preached was negatives. God was not presented as loving, caring, One who would meet you more than halfway. He was pictured as someone who held a club and would beat you into submission. In fact, the minister even said not to follow all those false preachers who only preached about love.
It seems to me that there are so many really love starved people in our world who, if they saw a God of love through our ministry, that there would start a hunger in their spiritual bellies for this true love!

[Mark Metcalfe]

I have to agree with Marsha in one respect. In my earlier days, all I heard was fire and brimstone preaching, it seemed as if I should get salvation as "fire insurance" and all that was preached was negatives. God was not presented as loving, caring, One who would meet you more than halfway. He was pictured as someone who held a club and would beat you into submission. In fact, the minister even said not to follow all those false preachers who only preached about love.
It seems to me that there are so many really love starved people in our world who, if they saw a God of love through our ministry, that there would start a hunger in their spiritual bellies for this true love!

This is what led to the question about what the gospel message is.
In a 150 years past, "fire and brimstone" was an acceptable and
arguably effective message. I suppose one reason that this has
changed is the perception that you have articulated. It was not
in my experience, however.

One can preach about the sin condition without communicating a
God who beats people into submission. Perhaps I was lucky to sit
under a preacher who knew the difference. (Thanks, Dad.)

God is sufficient to meet our needs. That means that if I am
lost in sin, He can save. That means if I am His child and in
need of rebuke, correction, chastisement, and discipline, He
can do so out of love.

Have we become afraid to speak of a God who chastises His
own people? Have we (Christians) become numb and rejected
God's chastisement, rationalizing it as inappropriate guilt feelings.
God loves me just the way I am, therefore I need not change;
love never forces itself on another person and God always,
always loves me. Is there a heaven to gain and a hell to shun?

Do we intend to simply show others how nice we are in the hope
that they will want to follow God? Or should we tell people that
there is a condition of sin that puts us at odds with a Holy God,
and that Jesus can eradicate sin from our lives and set us on
the path to knowing God who is love, and loving, and also
discplines those whom He loves for their benefit?

What is the gospel message?

Mark

[Mark Metcalfe]

I've read this thread twice, trying to figure out what it is we're talking about. The heading reads, "Does God love you just the way you are?"

Answer: Of course he does. Next question.

Hey, Bruce. The simple question and simple answer are fine.
The discussion highlighted the fact that the phrase can have
several connotations, which led to mostly a discussion of semantics.

As far as I am concerned, I concluded my end of the semantic
discussion by suggesting that the phrase is open to too much
interpretation to be of much use. Since then, the conversation
has turned to how and what the message of the gospel is
conveyed.

Mark

[Marsha Lynn]

(Having been involved in two hijacked threads this week while vegetating and nursing a head cold, I thought I would start a new thread for this digression.)

In the "God loves you just the way you are" thread, Mark wrote (http://www.naznet.com/community/showthread.php?p=12135#poststop):
Do we intend to simply show others how nice we are in the hope that they will want to follow God?

I've heard many variations of the 'nice person' versus Christian contrast. They generally go like this, "If Christians don't __________________ then there is no difference between them and non-Christians who are simply nice." I'm not sure Mark was following that pattern, but bringing up the 'niceness' issue reminded me of this.

My question is this: If you put a Christian and a non-Christian who prides himself on being a nice person together on a reality show and told the Christian that he could not speak of his faith (and he agreed to that restriction), could you tell the difference? If so, how? Would the difference, if there was one, be noticeable enough that someone might be attracted to Christianity by it?

I have some thoughts on this (as you might have guessed :basic03) but will give others a chance to respond first.

Marsha

[Hans Deventer]

A teacher poured a liquid into an empty jar. He demonstrated that the jar was indeed not empty but full of air, and that as the liquid filled the jar, it displaced the air.

It is not that it is not so much the taking away... it is that both the
filling and the taking are performed simultaneously.

Saved from... Saved to...



Yes. And how? By pooring in. I'm not sure where you are disagreeing here or stating anything I didn't say. Only God's love can chase away the sin. We can't stop sinning on our own and have the void be filled by nothing, that is impossible. It allways starts with receiving God's love. I think that is the very point of the discussion.

[Hans Deventer]

God is sufficient to meet our needs. That means that if I am lost in sin, He can save. That means if I am His child and in
need of rebuke, correction, chastisement, and discipline, He
can do so out of love.

Have we become afraid to speak of a God who chastises His
own people? Have we (Christians) become numb and rejected
God's chastisement, rationalizing it as inappropriate guilt feelings.
God loves me just the way I am, therefore I need not change;
love never forces itself on another person and God always,
always loves me. Is there a heaven to gain and a hell to shun?

What is the gospel message?

It is a message that tells you that every foundation of being, of self worth, that is not God, has to be destroyed. Therefore, you can never stay as you are, that is totally impossible. In order for you to let God destroy these false foundations, you need to understand however that He totally and unconditionally loves you, just as you are.

This is no cheap grace. This is no justification of the sin in stead of the sinner (Bonhoeffer). This talks about God actually hurting us, about suffering, and yes indeed, about "need of rebuke, correction, chastisement, and discipline". All of that.

But we won't let Him, we won't submit to that, unless we understand He has something to offer that makes it all worthwhile. Otherwise we shun every suffering, try to avoid any discipline. And THAT is what I see as the main problem you are describing. It is not that we need to tell people "God is love but..." for otherwise they would just continue as they are. I think many people still haven't understood that He really is love and able and willing to be our all.

[Hans Deventer]

It seems to me that there are so many really love starved people in our world who, if they saw a God of love through our ministry, that there would start a hunger in their spiritual bellies for this true love!

Exactly, Bob.

[Ian Gentles]

Of course God loves us, loves everyone. Also, because He loves me He wants me to change, be what He wants me to be.

In regards to God loving us, maybe big problem is, many cant accept it for various reasons, even among we christians. We live in a world, in churches, yearning for a felt love. Maybe we are too theological about God's love, when we should be asking, "Why dont more christian folks feel that love?"

As to God wanting to change us. I'm not satisfied with myself, and if I'm not satisfied then surely God isnt? But His love I accept, although my acceptance is often cerebel ! Is this wrong? What is it to know the love of God?

[Hans Deventer]

What is it to know the love of God?

That, dear brother, is indeed the question. I am not there yet myself. The road ahead has been getting somewhat clearer in the last year and a half. I am starting to understand a little more of the implications and how fundamental it is. But I am still on a journey, reading books by Henri Nouwen, Brennan Manning, and the manuscript by Brad & Roland. I do appreciate anyone who wants to travel with me!

[Ian Gentles]

Well Nowen is a good start. :)
May I suggest we, all, often lack true honesty, often, in describing out spiritual lifes. Am I satisfied with mine? No!

[Mark Metcalfe]

From the base note:


The phrase "God loves you just the way you are" typifies the culture clash,
I think. It sounds nice, but it is not true. "God loves you" is true... but
has come into this world to change you and give you new life. This is
a gospel message that is being lost - that we are to be changed; the
culture today adds God to their lives without changing life. The gospel
turns things around; (that is the definition of repentence).


I want to attempt to clarify my original post based on the discussions
here starting with "It sounds nice, but it is not true."

It sounds nice, but depending on the way you parse the phrase,
and depending on the way you want to view it, it can mean something
that is not true. God loves you, period. Love, though it is perpetual
and continual, achingly yearns for you to come out of the way you
are into the way you are meant to be.

The Prodigal Son story illustrates this in that the the father watched
for his son, and even ran to meet him; his love never faltered even in
the face of rejection. BUT, the son was separated from the father.
Luke 15:24 puts it this way: "For this son of mine was dead and is
alive again; he was lost and is found."

The father loved the son, even though rejected and in the far country.
The father loved him for who he was, as opposed to "just the way he
was." The father did not love the rejection, the squandering of his
wealth, the fact that his son was lost and "dead" to him; yet that is
how the son was. The person is distinct from the circumstance
and God loves the person no matter what circumstances a person
may be in.

The son could hardly believe that his father would take him back,
but against hope he decided to plead for a lowly servant's job.
A dead son can come back to life. That is how much God loves
you.

I still do not like the phrase "God loves you just the way you are"
because "the way you are" can connote circumstances and the
object of God's love is you; "who you are," and not "the way you are."

Mark

[Kim Hersey]

Ok, for the first time, I want the old software... I know, I just have to change my settings... but the view I have doesn't let me know who's responding to what in the thread...

ah, shucks... the new is still better!


Kim

[Brad Mercer]

Ok, for the first time, I want the old software... I know, I just have to change my settings... but the view I have doesn't let me know who's responding to what in the thread...

ah, shucks... the new is still better!


Kim

Kim, when you're reading a post, look toward the upper right part of the screen and click on "Display Mode" and then select "Hybrid Mode". It lets you see the threaded look you're used to from the old software at the top part of the screen, and any individual post you click on at the bottom part of the screen. That's what I do when I'm not clear who's responding to what.

Brad

[Kim Hersey]

Thanks, Brad... I got it. You're too kind.

Kim :D