I stumbled upon Pastor Prince's online
sermonette recently and it is about love. The scripture is 1 John 4:10 and the
theme is "we love because He first
loved us." Pastor Prince's opening line caught my attention and here
is more:-
"You
have to love God more! You must have more passion for God! You have probably
heard this type of preaching and may have even tried your best to love God,
only to fail miserably.
"Pastor
Prince, the Bible says that you must love God with all your heart, soul and
strength!"
Yes,
that is true according to the law (Deut. 6:5), and even Jesus taught that as
the great commandment when He walked on earth (Matthew 22:37). But that was
before He died on the Cross. At the Cross, He became the very fulfillment of
this law for us when He loved us with all His heart, soul and strength, by
laying down His body and life on the Cross for us."
At this point, I've to confess that I was
baffled. Everything was okay until Pastor Prince seemed to suggest that loving
God with all your heart, your soul and your strength “was before He died on the Cross”. Isn’t that the timeless commandment? Is the radical grace preacher mistaken? So I read on:-
"Today
we are no longer under the law but under grace. And grace tells us that God
loves us, not that we love God. Yet, we will love Him when we see how much He
loves us. The Bible says that while we were still sinners, Christ died for us.
That's how much He loves us!”
I guess he was not (mistaken that is). He was
serious about that redundancy of the Law part (and that 1st commandment
to love God with all your heart, soul and strength). Here's how he concluded
before my commentary in full below:-
"Beloved,
God has seen you trying your best to love Him. And because He loves you, He
wants you to sit down and be still, and let Him love you instead. He wants to
love you with all that He is and love you with all that He has. He loves you
unconditionally regardless of who you are and what you have done because His
love is not dependent on you but on Himself. He will never stop loving you.
So
let God love you today. Don't worry about loving Him. The more of His love you
receive, the more you will fall in love with Him!"
What does Pastor Prince mean when he writes,
"Don't worry about loving Him?”
Is he saying that we don't need to love God with all our heart, our soul and our strength any more since we are living post-Calvary? Aren’t the greatest two commandments
about loving God and loving your neighbors?
There is no doubt that I see his point about
God loving us first and that itself shows how much He loves us. And I somewhat understand the need for
Christians to experience (or be open to) God's love first because His love is unconditional and
it is not dependent on us (as grace is an unmerited gift). I underscore "somewhat" because the reality of belief
for many people I know (or come to read about) is very different from the
rosy-picture that Pastor Prince had drawn. But be that as it may (a topic for another day), what then should be
our response to God’s love?
I think the key sentence to answer that question is this:
"The more of His love you receive,
the more you will fall in love with Him!" So, our response is that we
will love Him even more after receiving more of His love? Well, that is sound to
me but it poses a little conundrum when I read the online sermonette above in context.
Let me clarify.
If we are living post-Calvary, and the commandment to love
God with all our heart, soul and strength is done away with - as it is under the Law - then what is
our response to God loving us based on? If it is not with all our heart, all
our soul and all our strength, then with what? The exercise of personal free will in response has to come from us just
as God exercises His own free will to love us first, right?
You see, what is confounding is this: the query moves stealthily from a matter of clarification ("what is our
response based on") to one of practicality, that is, how do we love God
back without being first moved by our own conviction, our own volition/choices,
and our own action/response? Shouldn't it be a two-way flow of Him loving us
and we loving Him back? And if this is
so, how do we then love God back if not with all our heart, all our soul and
all our strength? Is Pastor Prince
playing with words (or theology) for effect? Is this a post-modern gnostic spin
to exegesis? (it may appear that I am "splitting-hair" here but isn't the devil always in the details or strands? And I have to confess that the hair-split between law and grace is all the more disconcerting for me).
Surely we are called to be responsive and to
be responsive because we want to be responsive. It is a choice we make to
respond and we respond out of personal conviction and sufficient understanding
(and not mindlessly following the crowd). It is still us doing the responding
and no one else. Well, I can’t deny that God’s spirit is doing the wooing, but
aren’t we doing the responding?
In other words, I can't dismiss the Old
Testament commandment and Jesus' own words to us that we are to "love God with all our heart, soul and
strength.” I see no way out of that
and the fact that we are living post-Calvary makes no difference to the first commandment.
That commandment thus survives
Calvary just as the second commandment to love our neighbors is eminently
relevant after Calvary.
This is how I see it. As you grow in the
disciplines of the Spirit, bearing fruits in your life, and overcoming trials
through His strength and guidance, you grow in fellowship with God and you love
Him even more. Yet, it’s still a personal choice. In other words, you love Him
in no other way than “with all your
heart, soul and strength.” Even if you “fail
miserably” to love Him, it is still a choice you make and God will not
intervene with that. It’s predominantly free will and heaven is not going to be
populated by human robots (Calvinism
notwithstanding). We are no automatons and He did not create us that way. If
Adam and Eve were battery-operated, or chargeable by plugging into a socket,
then we would not need Calvary. Neither the tree of the knowledge of good and
evil would be necessary.
For the above reason, I feel that Pastor
Prince’s online sermonette is milking for effect or it is dabbling in esoteric
riddles. And the second part of his online sermonette is equally quizzical.
Here is a re-reading of it (which I call the spiritual spa treatment):-
"Beloved,
God has seen you trying your best to love Him. And because He loves you, He
wants you to sit down and be still, and let Him love you instead. He wants to
love you with all that He is and love you with all that He has. He loves you
unconditionally regardless of who you are and what you have done because His
love is not dependent on you but on Himself. He will never stop loving you.
"
Somehow, the part about sitting down and be
still and allowing God to love you and not worrying about loving Him back just
go down well with some believers’ pamper-me-up
theology. Of course the mature Christians will take it with a pinch of salt,
but what if that is what a less-than-discerning
believer wants (or is addicted) to hear?
Over time, many of them will find that things
just do not hold up the way it is preached from the pulpit. It just doesn't add
up. They will inevitably have trust and doubts issues. Not all of their prayers
will be answered the way they want it to be answered. They will experience
brokenness, betrayal and disillusionment. They will be embattled by a cruel
world, unfriendly and unfeeling. The unrelenting reality will be biting and it
might chew off a large chunk of their pampered faith. Isn’t there a danger of nurturing self-therapeutic faith rather than
resilient, overcoming faith?
Here
is where I derail a little to let off some steam. I
always believe that it is easy to share the good news without the bad part
about counting the cost. The cost bit is always the inconvenient truth that
prosperity preachers and their ilk want to avoid talking about. You see, we
live in a world where suffering for one's faith is best kept within the privacy
of one's lament. No one appears to be edified by how much pain you are going
through without any relief in sight. But everyone swoons over a narration about
a loving god who only has our interest at heart and who happens (quite
conveniently) to love everything we love and hate everything we hate and is
therefore readily eager to give us everything we want with the only condition
that we keep believing without fail that all that is true; even when our
reality is so detached from that rosy picture presented. If we are a
feel-good-driven generation, then Pastor Prince’s sermonette may risk
overdosing us in a world that exists only in our child-like imagination.
Alas, the prosperity gospel (intoxicated by
radical grace) is undoubtedly more about the prosperity (and ourselves) rather than
about the gospel and its costs. But then,
I have digressed.
I end here with these parting words: Pastor Prince's
online sermonette is either a case where brevity is offered at the expense of
clarity or he is spinning an enticing yarn that is far removed from the reality
that an ordinary Christian faces. Pick
your poison. Cheerz.
Joseph Prince is heretic. God bless your family. ✝️
ReplyDelete