(And thank you for the compliment.)

On a personal note… wish I could write like you.

So, I think I understand what you are saying, and I agree with you on this: we cannot settle merely for a sentiment of love. But I am simply suggesting that a love that does produce action is indeed a genuine love, even before that action occurs. But, I’ll leave the point there, as I think we probably understand each other and have both made our respective cases well. In practical terms, there’s really not a lot for us to disagree over on this nuance, as we both assert that actions are the result of the kind of real love we are discussing.

For the benefit of anyone else reading (not for you, because I know you understand this), I also want to reiterate here that the love-that-acts that we are discussing does not require everyone to be a missionary to the poor and needy in their nearest big city.

The greatest need of all is for each person to hear the proclamation of repentance and forgiveness of sins in Christ. And nearly all of us are surrounded by people with this need, unless we happen to live on a remote mountain top somewhere.

And even in terms of the love-that-acts manifesting itself in serving other people in practical ways, most of us have opportunities thusly to serve our brothers and sisters in Christ, our neighbours, our work colleagues, and so on. Usually, these things happen discretely, one-to-one with our neighbour in need.

I say these things lest anyone think that either of us is criticizing, for example, a busy mom who has her hands full raising her children. She might not be called as a missionary to some big city, but she is serving her children, her husband, her neighbour (‘Hello, Mrs. Jones, I’ve brought you your weekly shopping. How are you today?’). And she is given opportunities to share the Good News of Christ with her children, her husband, her neighbour… Not out of compulsion, but because she delights in doing that.

But I do want to pick up on one thing you said:

‘And practically, the best way to stir up that love is in the action of it.’

I get what you’re saying. And, in many senses, you are not wrong – I agree that meeting people and seeing first-hand their plight stirs up a desire to do something. And doing that something further reinforces the compassion and love. But, you don’t even have to be a believer for that.

The problem I have with the statement here is what it leaves out. And yes, I get that you were making an important point, not making a final and definitive statement of practice I know too that you have an emphasis on the Gospel. You know that the Gospel must be communicated.

But history shows that the Gospel must also be kept front and centre, or else the practical things that we can see will crowd it out. Maybe not this year. But give it five or 10. Give it a new generation of converts who were not trained to focus, first and foremost, exclusively even, upon Christ and Him crucified. Then, you will see the proclamation of the Gospel begin to fade.

I thus come back to the point of my article.

What really matters, what is effective and powerful, is the proclamation of repentance and the remission of sins in Christ. And pastors are called to proclaim this message to their flocks, to feed them with it week in and week out.

The Gospel thus proclaimed will inevitably have its fruit, even producing a compassionate love-that-acts. That compassion will then be magnified and stirred-up through its outworking with the people that we meet. But the origin of the love-that-matters is in the faith that comes by the hearing of the Gospel, not in seeing the plight of our neighbour, nor even in acting to meet his need.

The love that comes by the Gospel will cause us to reach out with the Gospel and practical deeds. The love that comes by seeing the needy – even by helping them – will tend to focus only upon practical deeds. And that was why I created the video I did for my article, The mysterious case of the disappearing gospel.

I am thus unwilling to deny my assertion that the love-that-matters is the one that comes by faith through the hearing of the Gospel:

‘We love Him because He first loved us. If someone says, “I love God,” and hates his brother, he is a liar; for he who does not love his brother whom he has seen, how can he love God whom he has not seen? And this commandment we have from Him: that he who loves God must love his brother also.’ (1 John 4:19–21, NKJV)

You have done a wonderful job here of stirring us out of our complacency. Thank you. I hope that I have performed at least an adequate one of making the case for the supremacy of the proclamation of Christ and Him crucified.

Surely you can say you love generally, like for instance, I love Indians, Asians, poor people, alcoholics or the lost. What you are saying is that for this particular class of people, you have a particular pity. You understand their plight generally and sometimes you identify because you were once one of them as you stated better than I.

And also surely the love of God is shed abroad in our hearts and we are constrained by the love of God to live for God and take our mission as His ambassadors (2 Cor 5: 11ff).

So in these two ways, we have a God generated love that grants to us Christ’s pity, “for God so loved the world.”

The nuance (and you actually addressed it), is in James’ and John’s comments that beg the question, is ‘love’ without a practical outworking love at all? Is it possible that it is just sentimental pity but not love?

Considered the phrase “moved with compassion” used of Jesus in the Gospels. Without boring your friends with the greek, the word is essence means that I am so internal moved, stimulated and stirred that action is not optional but necessary. The words immediately following these are always words of action… he was moved with compassion and he healed them, taught them, etc. For God so loved the world…. that he did something.

The language escapes us here of course, and I just restated what you said, but it seems to me that there is a functional distinction between the sentiment of love and the action produced by that sentiment. Which brings me to my former point, when Jesus was “moved with compassion” it was always real life situation with real people that he was looking at and in the proximity of.

I’ll spot you that it is a bit overstated and perhaps misstated but we missional types can’t settle for a sentiment of love, even one that is accompanied with tears, that compels no action. And practically, the best way to stir up that love is in the action of it.

My head hurts.

BC