GOD'S LOVE

“Love is a smoke raised with the fume of sighs; being purged, a fire sparkling in lover’s eyes; being vexed a sea nourished with lovers’ tears: What is it else? a madness most discreet, a choking gall and a preserving sweet” or, so says Shakespeare through his tragic suitor Romeo. Erich Segal, in his much forgettable Love Story, had Jennifer say to Oliver, “Love means never having to say you’re sorry.” A few years ago, Tina Turner demonstrated our post-modern confusion with even the simplest of emotions by asking the pointed question, “What’s love got to do with it?”

Whatever we think of Shakespeare, Segal, and Turner, the fact remains that love is a subject that we cannot long ignore. Hallmark and American Greeting have made certain that no occasion passes without someone around you expecting a reminder of your undying love and affection. Just look at your calendar; there is some observation just around the bend and someone, somewhere is expecting a card from you affirming your unending love.

Perhaps our generation is more confused over the meaning of love than any in recent memory. Modern culture portrays love as something you catch like a disease. If you are in the right place at the right time- Zap! just like catching the common cold, you’re infected. Romantic notions of love-at-first-sight have polluted our cultural mythology. We no longer understand or feel the need for the natural progression from friendship to affection to love. Media portrayals of love teach us that we may very well be joined intimately- and then, as an afterthought, may consider the question of love and commitment, or the name of our partner. One of the hottest shows on HBO for a number of years was "Sex and the City" and the follow-on movie sequel is receiving extensive coverage in the newspapers and magazines currently. "Sex and the City" is a celebration of Eros, a show dedicated to confusing physical attraction with genuine love and tawdry love affairs with true commitment.

To further confuse matters, we are told contradictory things about the nature of love. Some say that love, if it is real, is always unconditional and makes no demand upon its object. Others tell us that love must be tough, must not facilitate self-destructive behavior but seek to change the object of its desires. How can we pick our way through this maze? Perhaps we would do well go the Scriptures and see what God has to say about love. As you have no doubt noticed, our text is devoted to that very subject.

As we look into the nature of love, one of the problems we encounter is the inadequacy of the English language. Although rich in many ways, our language is impoverished, offering only one word to do duty for that which the Greek language, the language of our New Testament, had four words. First, the Greeks had a word, Storge, that meant natural love, or family love. It was used to describe the love that binds parent and child. It could even be stretched to include the love for some larger body, such as patriotic love for one’s country. This is a love rooted in familiarity, not so much in the desirability of the object of love. Perhaps a close English gloss for storge would be our word affection. We might, then, talk about loving an old pair of slippers or a crusty old relative.

I have an old baseball glove that I have owned since I was twelve years old. It is called the “Sacred Mit” because no profane hands may touch it without my permission. It is really not worth much, as old and worn as it is. However, I love that mit; that is, I have a strong sentimental attachment to it. For what it is worth, the word that describes this love, storge, is not used in the New Testament.

A second Greek word for love, Eros, also fails to appear in the New Testament. Eros is romantic love. It is the name of the little Greek god with the bow and arrows, the figure we call Cupid. Now Eros is more than sexual love, although sexuality is deeply related to romantic love. Anyone who has read the Old Testament book Song of Solomon knows that erotic love is part of romantic love.

However, there are two peculiar facts about Eros that distinguish it: 1) It is love that is based on the worth of the beloved. And 2), it is love that desires to possess. You have heard, “beauty is in the eye of the beholder.” You and I may not understand romantic love, but if two people are in love, it is because they find something attractive in each other. Also, you will never hear a real man say, “I am in love with Mary, but I don’t care who marries her.” Eros desires to possess the one deemed attractive. This, however, is not the New Testament understanding of love.

There is a third Greek word for love, Philia. This is the love of friendship, of one man for another, or of a woman for her close friend. Philadelphia is the city of brotherly love, that is, unless you’ve lived there as I have, and know better! Concerning Philia, C.S. Lewis said, “Friendship is unnecessary, like philosophy, like art, like the universe itself (for God did not need to create). It has no survival value; rather, it is one of those things which gives value to survival.” Friendship is a love that is built on common insight or shared tastes, something that two individuals experience together and not in common with the masses. Philia is used only once in the New Testament, although the verbal form is used on several occasions. D.A. Carson, noted New Testament scholar, says that one of the reasons for its infrequent use is the fact that by the first century, philia was used quite regularly as a synonym for kiss and thus would have limited appeal to the New Testament writers.

At last we come to the fourth Greek word for love, Agape. This is a word that was rarely used before the New Testament, but was used extensively by the writers of Scripture. Why would the Christians choose to use such an otherwise obscure word to express the meaning of love? It is not true that agape means “divine love,” per se. Nor is it entirely accurate to say that the writers of Scripture sought to portray a love that could not be expressed by any of the other words. However, Agape is used frequently in reference to divine love. When used to describe God’s love, it is fair to say that it represents love that is determined by the one who loves, not by something in the one who is loved. It is love that is “a free and decisive act determined by its subject.”

Agape is love that does not arise because of the worth of the object, nor is it love that selfishly seeks to possess for its own gain. We find that in our text. “Love is patient, love is kind. It does not envy, it does not boast, it is not proud. It is not rude, it is not self-seeking, it is not easily angered, it keeps no record of wrongs. Love does not delight in evil, but rejoices with the truth. It always protects, always trusts, always hopes, always perseveres. Love never fails.”

This is the essence of love, not only in the New Testament, but even in the Old Testament. In Deuteronomy 7, Moses explained to the people of Israel, “The Lord your God has chosen you out of all the peoples on the face of the earth to be his people, his treasured possession.” This divine love is intentional, predicated on an act of the will that decides to engage in relationship. Moses went on in the passage to say this, “The Lord did not set his affection on you and choose you because you were more numerous than other peoples, for you were the fewest of all peoples. But it was because the Lord loved you . . . that he brought you out with a mighty hand and redeemed you from the land of slavery.” Did you get that? God loved Israel as a free act of his own will, not because there was anything lovely in them, anything commendable about them. That is the love that is Agape.

And we see such love displayed even more pointedly in the New Testament. Paul wrote to the church at Rome “that God demonstrated his own love for us in that while we were still sinners, Christ died for us.” My friends, this is unconditional love. Knowing full well that he was getting damaged goods, God chose to love us anyway. Fully aware that there is none righteous among us, that we all have sinned and come short of the glory of God- God nonetheless gave his only begotten son, that whoever believes in him would not die but have eternal life. He sees us as we are, warts and all- and loves us anyway. And, boy, do we have a hard time accepting this. As a rule, that is not how we love- so we have a terrible time believing that anyone, including our Heavenly Father, could love in that way.

Consider this further. The noted scholar Leon Morris reminds us that “God’s love is not some vague, theoretical thing, a woolly benevolence. It took the hard way: it meant the cross.” (Apostolic Preaching of the Cross, Morris, p. 133) As Paul wrote to the Corinthian Christians, “He has made him who knew no sin to become sin for us.” The spotless Son of God becomes the guilty, cursed bearer of our sin as a manifestation of the Father’s love for us!

That is tough love! Don’t you think- if there had been some other way to provide forgiveness, God would have used it? Don’t you suppose he would have avoided the cross if there were another way to overcome sin? There wasn’t. And, thankfully, the exorbitant price of this cross did not hinder his love for you and me.

Now a further thought. This love that arises out of an unconditional acceptance is nevertheless a love that is intentional and focused. God, who loves us in spite of our sin, desires that we do not remain in that sin. He paid an infinite price in the death of his son on the cross. This is history’s greatest display of love. But, he who paid such a great price to forgive our sins, to make us children of God, desires that we turn from those sins and bear the family image. We read in Hebrews 12:6, “For whom the Lord loves he disciplines, and he scourges every son whom he welcomes.” In other words, the “writer is thus pointing out that God cares enough to do the unpleasant thing for the sake of his beloved.” Love is not incompatible with a desire for change in the beloved—and God desires that we all learn to look like Jesus.

So, then, what does this mean for us? Well, the implications are clear. God is love and we love him because he first loved us. Furthermore, by this, Jesus said, shall all men know you are my disciples— that you love one another. Let me confess something to you. For years I read our text, the love chapter, and marveled at the love of God. I wallowed in the depths of God’s love and stood amazed at its breadth. But there is one thing I did not do, not for years, at least. I never drew the conclusion that since God’s love was at work in my life, I was supposed to love that very same way! Today, I am astounded that I could have been so dense!

You and I are to be “patient and kind. We are not to envy, not to boast, not to be proud. We are not to be rude, or self-seeking, not easily angered. We are to keep no record of wrongs. We must not delight in evil, but rejoice with the truth. We are always to protect, always to trust, always to hope, always to persevere. Love never fails, and neither should we.” Say, that puts it all in a different light, doesn’t it!

Now for some application. If there is any place where we ought to exercise divine love, it is in our relationships with our spouses. Yet, this is the place where, I suspect, we are most likely to fail most miserably! Why? Perhaps familiarity breeds contempt. Perhaps we use up all our long-suffering in the workplace and have little left over when we get home. Whatever the reason, or the excuse, it is not good enough. Our text does not offer “exceptions to policy!” Look, too often what we do in our marriage relationships looks as though we consider everything apart from love. Our behavior does not believe all things, but instead keeps an exact record of all wrongs, perceived or actual; it is proud and boastful, envious, self-seeking and rude. Our attitudes and actions towards our husband or wife do not protect; it does not trust. It accuses, judges, and condemns; it has the sulfurous smell of hell about it.

Brothers and sisters, this will not do! Our text says we are to love even as God loves—and we make no mistake about it; this is not an easy thing for us to do. Yet, I would remind you, the cross was not an easy thing to do. The cross was tough love. It was tough for Jesus to bear our guilt. It was tough for the Father to turn his back on his son hanging on the cross. It was tough for God to love us while we were yet sinners. And it will be tough for you and for me to learn to live by the words of our text, to love that which is not always lovely; to be willing to seek the good of others, especially our spouse, above our own; and to think the best and to give the benefit when in doubt.

But learn to live by these words we must, if as married men and women, (or as those who one day plan to be married) we will honor God. If we will learn to live in peace, it will be because we prefer one another and do not seek our own way. Have you experienced the love of God shed abroad in your hearts? Are you seeking the well-being of your fellow Christians and, most importantly in light of this weekend, the best interests of the man or woman you have pledged to honor above all?

My dear brothers and sisters, “love never fails. But where there are prophecies, they will cease; where there are tongues, they will be stilled; where there is knowledge, it will pass away. . . . And now these three remain: faith, hope, and love.” Today, we walk by faith, but one day by sight, for we shall see him as he is. Today, we hope in the Lord’s promise of redemption, but one day we shall be with him, and our hope will be fulfilled. But throughout endless ages, one thing will continue without interruption: we shall never cease to experience the ever-deepening love of God. That is why our text says so simply, and yet most eloquently, “the greatest of these is love.”