I'm not sure exactly what you think LOVE is or is based on.
LOVE identifies value and responds to it.
My love is not based on identifying the value of another person or thing. I think you must admit that love for others is not based on that as well. Some love is, of course. But not all. Otherwise we would stop loving people that hurt us... like a child, or a spouse, or a sister/brother/mother/father.
Although I guess I must admit that I believe every life has value. Not based on anything any particular person does. But simply because it is life.
Let me walk you through what I'm saying from beginning to end and we'll see at what point I lose you on this.
Okay, but as you can see from above.... ;)
What is our natural response to a brutal man who beats his children mercilessly? I know you would not say: Love.
Agreed. Most of the time it is anger. Sometimes it is also sadness for all involved, and whatever brought them to this place. Perhaps a failure to head off the violence in a man who was damaged as a child. Perhaps just sadness for the children being hurt now.
Why? Is it a failing on our part?
No, it is a loathing for the character of the man and destructive nature of his behavior. Our loathing is rational!
I don't really loathe many things... but I'm still with you here.
What we reward we get more of. What we punish we get less of.
We do often get more of what we reward. However, I don't think human nature or statistics on crime, etc, will agree with your second point. We must also correct -and teach a better way - and punishment does not do that on its own.
If we embrace the child molester, the wife beater, the murdering sociopath and shower them with loving mercy and emotional warmth WHAT STANDARD of behavior are we basing that on? Are we encouraging them or discouraging them by our positive emotional outpouring??
You can discipline someone whilst also showing mercy and compassion/love. Ensure the safety of innocents (which might certainly mean jail for the perpetrator), but then also attempt to correct behavior by teaching a better way. Love and mercy do beget love and mercy. Not on all occasions, true, and there is nothing to be done in those cases. (In those cases, I would say that the damage to that person was done long ago, in the failings of people and society to help him/her before they got to such a state that they only understood and inflicted violence, hatred, etc.)
But on the other hand, on most occasions hate begets hate. Insult begets insult. Violence begets violence. It takes someone not responding in kind to break the cycle.
I'm saying what is BAD is bad because it is repulsive to anyone recognizing that goodness is possible and preferable and the bad is intolerable in contrast.
If the Supreme Being stands for GOOD and opposes EVIL we might well ask: on what basis if not the very nature of the deeds identifying those actions?
Who is the standard bearer who can actually recommend the Bestif the Worst is rewarded handsomely?
Why do you assume that showing someone mercy and love is a reward for bad behavior? Perhaps it is the hope of a correction and move toward better behavior? Perhaps it is hope for healing all the way around?
Right/wrong or good/evil or reward/punishment... this world has been following those black/white judgments since the dawn of time, and we have yet to eradicate war, violence, crimes, etc. Mercy, education, correction, understanding, help (all of which are fruits of love)... these are the things that we need to heal the sick of this world. Which is most of us, just to greater or lesser degrees.
But eye for eye leaves the whole world blind.
Imagine a football game where points are deducted for touchdowns and awarded for fumbles!
Imagine a school where A's are given for failure and F's for top achievement!
How would that produce a better world?
Again, how is showing love and mercy a reward for bad behavior? It is simple compassion, and this can go a long way to changing someone.
How is any of the above any different from the weird story we are told:
God allows his innocent Son to die as an evil criminal while He grants complete pardon to all the guilty in the world.
He did not grant complete pardon to all the guilty in the world.
But even so, lets say that he did grant pardon to some on the basis of the love that someone else has for them. That Christ has for them. It is a different standard than what you think is right and just. But that does not mean it isn't right and just.
Does Christ, the innocent who suffered and died, not deserve what He asks for?
We might not deserve what he is asking for us... but He deserves for it to be granted to Him.
And this is to satisfy WHOSE righteous standard? Drum roll please....................................GOD himself!
Yes, I suppose. Love, mercy and all that.
Which God are we talking about here? It couldn't be the same God who gave us the Law of Moses that says Like for Like.
But we know that some of the laws that Moses gave were based on the hard-heartedness of the people, and were made in allowance for that. Not because that is what God wanted.
Forgiving evil has to be an act that is JUST to make any sense morally.
Christ deserves what HE asked for. Do you know what that can invoke in people who understand the He speaks for us who do not deserve it? It invokes love, and gratitude, and the desire to follow Him and obey His teachings... and to do the same for others that He did for us.
A Criminal Courts judge who automatically frees child molesters would be impeached. Should we decry the impeachment because the Judge is such a kind soul?
"And if anyone causes one of these little ones to sin, it would be better for him to have a millstone tied around his neck..."
There is justice Terry. But justice is not just without being tempered by mercy. God knows what is right. Sometimes we do as well.
Our understanding of "perfection" has nothing to do with anything but calling a spade a spade and not mincing our words or corrupting our values.
Perfection means calling a spade a spade and not mincing our words or corrupting our values?
Peace,
Tammy
