Views: 0<\/p>
[Note: <\/strong>This MS is available in larger font on our Manuscripts<\/strong> page.]<\/span><\/p>\n Introduction<\/strong><\/span><\/p>\n \u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0 Undiscerning and unscrupulous men have \u201cwordnapped,\u201d redefined, misused, and abused several rich and beautiful Biblical words. Among them are grace, faith, miracle, elect, <\/em>and predestined<\/em>. Love<\/em>, which Paul names a \u201cfruit of the Spirit,\u201d is another of these words (Gal. 5:22).1 Unspiritual men have dragged this word through their secular and sensual gutters, effectively stripping it in the minds of the masses of its pure and altruistic meaning. If order of appearance in listing implies relative significance, we infer that love is the premier quality of all lovely character traits, for Paul placed love first in this list of spiritual fruit. One might also consider the implication that love, because of its principal position in the list, is in some sense the root and basis of all the other traits. The apostle Peter also emphasized the primacy of love, but he did so by making it the final and crowning grace of the eight \u201cChristian graces\u201d (2 Pet. 1:5\u20137).<\/span><\/p>\n \u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0 Paul wrote of the \u201cfruit\u201d rather than the \u201cfruits\u201d of the Spirit. Each characteristic he listed in Galatians 5:22\u201323 is part of the singular manifold fruit the Holy Spirit produces in the lives of Christians as they develop and mature. One might conceive of this fruit as one with numerous individual sections, such as an orange has. However, unlike the orange whose sections all have the same flavor, the various \u201csections\u201d of this spiritual fruit have their own distinctive \u201cflavors.\u201d Love is one of these flavors, joy is another, and peace is yet another, and so with the other characteristics. From the context, it is obvious that God wills that His children partake of every \u201csection\u201d and \u201cflavor\u201d of this fruit that is so universally desirable that \u201c…against such there is no law\u201d (Gal. 5:23b).<\/span><\/p>\n \u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0 We will study this subject under the following headings:<\/span><\/p>\n The Derivation of Love<\/strong><\/span><\/p>\n \u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0 What is the source of the love that Paul in this passage sets before us as so desirable? We will spend only scant space here answering this, but it is appropriate to give it some attention here.<\/span><\/p>\n \u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0 Paul identifies love as part of \u201cthe fruit of the Spirit,\u201d indicating that it is the product <\/strong>of the Holy Spirit. I know of no one who has denied or even questioned this conclusion. It is fair to inquire about the means by which the Spirit of God produces love and its companion character traits. Until recent years, those counted faithful among the saints (regardless of their views on means by which the Spirit indwells us) understood and clearly taught that the Holy Spirit uses means to produce spiritual fruit in the lives of Christians. That is, He did\/does not directly<\/strong>, apart from some medium, operate upon the hearts of saints in some mystical way to cause one to be loving, joyful, longsuffering, and so forth.<\/span><\/p>\n \u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0 However, some, once counted among faithful brethren, began teaching a few years ago that the Spirit produces love and its companion traits by direct impact <\/strong>upon the spirit\/heart\/mind of Christians.2 This effect the Spirit allegedly causes is an \u201cextra benefit,\u201d in addition <\/strong>to the provisions He gives through His Word (Eph. 6:17), and those benefits we realize through the inscrutable workings of God\u2019s providence. Moreover, the chief protagonist of this view asserts that one must <\/strong>have the Spirit\u2019s direct <\/strong>help in order to produce the fruit of the Spirit.3<\/span><\/p>\n \u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0 In a very limited response to these assertions, I call attention to the following:<\/span><\/p>\n Because of the hope which is laid up for you in the heavens, whereof ye heard <\/strong>before in the word of the truth of the gospel<\/strong>, which is come unto you; even as it is also in all the world bearing fruit <\/strong>and increasing, as it doth in you also, since the day ye heard and knew the grace of God in truth…. For this cause we also, since the day we heard it, do not cease to pray and make request for you, that ye may be filled with the knowledge of his will <\/strong>in all spiritual wisdom and understanding, to walk worthily of the Lord unto all pleasing, bearing fruit in every good work, and increasing in the knowledge of God<\/strong>\u201d (Col. 1:5\u20136, 9\u201310, emph. DM).<\/span><\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n \u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0 Do not miss how closely Paul identifies the Spirit\u2019s Word <\/strong>with the spiritual fruit <\/strong>we are to bear. Paul credits the Word of Truth, the Gospel, God\u2019s will as being the cause that produces the effect of \u201cbearing fruit\u201d (twice). The fruit bearing occurs as one increases in \u201cthe knowledge of God.\u201d Note the following principles:<\/span><\/p>\n \u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0 Those who insist that we must\u2014and do\u2014have direct <\/strong>help from the Holy Spirit to live the Christian life successfully and triumphantly, dabble in Pentecostalism, Calvinism, Wesleyanism, and mysticism.<\/span><\/p>\n The Defilement of Love<\/strong><\/span><\/p>\n \u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0 There are numerous false concepts of love.4 By accentuating some of the things this most wholesome and lovely trait are not<\/strong>, we will be able thereby to demonstrate, at least to some degree, what it actually is<\/strong>.<\/span><\/p>\n Love Is Not Mere Words Spoken <\/em><\/strong><\/span><\/p>\n \u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0 John clearly stated the possibility that one may speak words of love without possessing love: \u201cMy little children, let us not love in word, neither with the tongue; but in deed and truth\u201d (1 John 3:18). John is not here forbidding or even discouraging the speaking of loving words. We all likely need to do more of this to one another in all of our relationships (e.g., husband-wife, parent-child, among brethren). The apostle is saying that words of love alone<\/strong>, apart from loving acts, do not constitute love.<\/span><\/p>\n \u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0 The statement in verse 18 is a conclusion and somewhat of a summary of what John\u00a0<\/span>began discussing in verse 14:<\/span><\/p>\n \u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0 \u201cWord-only\u201d love is as worthless as it is hypocritical. The Pharisees, scribes, and others frequently reviled and blasphemed our Lord. He denounced them as hypocrites on more than one occasion and for more than one reason. However, had they told Him they \u201cloved\u201d Him just after their bitter and hateful words of opposition and accusation, they would have but added to their hypocrisy. They may as well have claimed that they demanded His crucifixion because they loved Him so much!<\/span><\/p>\n \u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0 Some who read these words have doubtless witnessed (and\/or sometimes been on the receiving end of) cruel, heartless, and hateful actions merely for trying to be faithful to our Savior. Sometimes even brethren recklessly and without provocation spew out strong, loud, and abusive words of accusation and denunciation. Such railings are sometimes either immediately prefaced or followed by declarations of \u201clove\u201d for the subject of the abuse. It would be hard enough to deal with such if it came from associates at work or school, but it is made all the more imponderable and difficult to bear when a brother or sister in Christ is its source. All who so behave demonstrate hatred rather than love, and they become figurative murderers (v. 15). Such brethren are hypocrites in the fullest meaning of the term. They verily love in word and tongue only, which is all pretense and no love at all.<\/span><\/p>\n \u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0 Theological liberals pride themselves on their \u201clove\u201d for others (in contrast to those mean and hateful conservatives). Some, who will not actively teach error, nonetheless promote it by acting as \u201cbodyguards\u201d for those who do. Not only will these protectors not oppose or expose error and sin, but they do not want anyone else to do it either. So, when their pet false teachers and their false doctrines are exposed, these same \u201cloving\u201d folk often themselves become very skilled in their use of hateful words toward the teachers of Truth. They remind me of Joab, who with one hand pulled Amasa to him to kiss him and ask of his welfare, and with the other, stabbed him in the fifth rib with his sword (2 Sam. 20:8\u201310).<\/span><\/p>\n \u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0 Deeds that seem to express love can also be hypocritical and false, as exemplified by the kiss Judas gave the Lord in Gethsemane (Mat. 26:47\u201350). Thus we need to remember that John said we should love not only \u201cin deed,\u201d but \u201cin truth,\u201d meaning truly, genuinely. Paul\u2019s exhortation to the Romans is appropriate here: \u201cLet love be without hypocrisy\u201d (Rom. 12:9a).<\/span><\/p>\n Love Is Not Mere Emotion <\/em><\/strong><\/span><\/p>\n \u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0 Modern culture to a great degree has been caught up in romanticism. It is difficult to find persons today who are willing or able to think critically or who are even capable of rational or logical analysis and\/or response to stimuli. The common\u2014almost universal\u2014operational procedure is emotional rather than rational. This being so, the definition of \u201clove\u201d by many is some touchy-feely, ooey-gooey, superficial, and syrupy feeling or expression of feelings. Unfortunately, this misconception of love that turns the brain off and relies solely on surface emotions is alive and well among brethren. This flawed philosophy explains how brethren can hear a man entertain them with stories and illustrations while he teaches false doctrine, and they can come away almost enthralled with how \u201cdynamic\u201d he is. Such emotional mush is far removed from love.<\/span><\/p>\n \u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0 Having said that, it would be both foolish and erroneous to deny that love\u2014including agape <\/em>love\u2014involves the emotions. The other common New Testament Greek word for love <\/em>is phileo<\/em>, which actually connotes tender affection, thus strongly involving the emotions. Several passages set forth the emotional factor involved in the love saints are to have for each other. For example, Paul urged: \u201cIn love of the brethren be tenderly affectioned one to another; in honor preferring one another\u201d (Rom. 12:10). Peter makes an even fuller statement concerning the emotional ties brethren should have to each other: \u201cFinally, be ye all likeminded, compassionate, loving as brethren, tenderhearted, humble minded\u201d (1 Pet. 3:8).<\/span><\/p>\n \u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0 These passages mention such emotion-seated traits as tenderness, affection, and compassion, all of which are noble and desirable feelings that we should entertain and cultivate toward others. However, until we express them in appropriate words and\/or deeds, they remain mere feelings or emotions. Paul makes this plain in his personification of love (agape<\/em>) in 1 Corinthians 13:1\u20137.<\/span><\/p>\n \u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0 We learn from this marvelous passage that, even if we do not possess the emotion- based affectionate love (phileo<\/em>) for a person, we still have the obligation to exhibit the mind\/will- based love (agape<\/em>) for him. This obligatory love will cause us to speak and act toward him, even if he is an enemy, so as to seek his good and benefit. Such is the very love that God had for sinful man in the giving of His only begotten Son, as John 3:16 so eloquently and simply declares. Love does not consist of the mere affectionate feelings or emotions themselves, but of the appropriate expressions of these feelings.<\/span><\/p>\n Love Is Not Mere Lust or Sexual Fulfillment <\/em><\/strong><\/span><\/p>\n \u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0 My father was a Gospel preacher, and many years before I was a teenager, he asked a class of teenagers to define love<\/em>. When no one would volunteer a definition, he called on a young man who shrugged and said, \u201cJust sort of \u2018huggin\u2019 and kissin,\u2019 I guess.\u201d The entertainment industry (TV, movies, song lyrics, books of fiction) has so corrupted love <\/em>in the minds of the masses since the 1960s that love, lust, <\/em>and sex <\/em>have practically become synonyms. Pop singer, Jo Stafford, had a hit record in 1954 (before the sexual revolution of the 1960s) with her song, \u201cMake Love to Me.\u201d It was an innocent song about courtship that leads to life-long marriage, as its lyrics indicate. However, to most people the phrase make love <\/em>has gradually been warped almost exclusively to mean sexual activity.<\/span><\/p>\n \u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0 God has made us with sexual instincts, and fulfillment of this desire is wholesome and honorable within the institution and the limits set by God. In marriage alone, and that between a man and woman who have a Scriptural right to be married to each other, may one fulfill one\u2019s sexual instincts honorably and innocently: \u201cLet marriage be had in honor among all, and let the bed be undefiled\u201d (Heb. 13:4a). The expression of sexual love is not only a privilege of marriage partners; it is also a duty:<\/span><\/p>\n But, because of fornications, let each man have his own wife, and let each woman have her own husband. Let the husband render unto the wife her due: and likewise also the wife unto the husband. The wife hath not power over her own body, but the husband: and likewise also the husband hath not power over his own body, but the wife. Defraud ye not one the other, except it be by consent for a season, that ye may give yourselves unto prayer, and may be together again, that Satan tempt you not because of your incontinency (1 Cor. 7:2\u20135).<\/span><\/p><\/blockquote>\n \u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0 Sexual fulfillment outside of Scriptural marriage is forbidden by God and constitutes fornication and\/or adultery, which will cause one to be lost eternally if not repented of: \u201cfor fornicators and adulterers God will judge\u201d (Heb. 13:b). Paul wrote plainly of the eternal cost of sexual sins of which one does not repent and receive forgiveness:<\/span><\/p>\n Or know ye not that the unrighteous shall not inherit the kingdom of God? Be not deceived: neither fornicators, nor idolaters, nor adulterers, nor effeminate, nor abusers of themselves with men, nor thieves, nor covetous, nor drunkards, nor revilers, nor extortioners, shall inherit the kingdom of God (1 Cor. 6:9\u201310; cf. Gal. 5:19, 21; emph. DM).<\/span><\/p><\/blockquote>\n \u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0 It is lamentable beyond description to observe the social and cultural crises that have resulted from the misconception and abuse of this beautiful and wholesome trait of love. Over the past several decades millions of marriages have been based upon the Hollywood concept of sexual lust rather than unselfish love (as defined by the Bible). Most of these were doomed to end in divorce from the start, and conveniently, state legislators came up with \u201cno-fault divorce\u201d laws to accommodate the increased number of divorce cases that increasingly flooded the courts.<\/span><\/p>\n \u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0 The casual attitude toward divorce only intensified the ever-growing casual attitude toward marriage, which has practically become a meaningless \u201cthrow-away\u201d contract. The next \u201clogical\u201d step has been to question the need for marriage at all, so now millions are \u201cliving together\u201d (a euphemism for fornication), before and without marriage, in open and unblushing immorality. Many, not wanting to be \u201ctied down\u201d to one sexual partner even without marriage, just drift from bar to bar, looking for a \u201cone-night stand,\u201d likely rather easy to find after whatever inhibitions one may have had are washed away by a few drinks. Such behavior has come to be not only accepted, but glorified by entertainers, which provides them with a twisted sense of justification for their own barnyard \u201cmorals.\u201d<\/span><\/p>\n \u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0 This tortured definition of love <\/em>has produced millions of \u201cone-parent families\u201d in which children are being reared by minimum wage daycare personnel because father is missing (and sometimes unknown) and mother has to fill the role of breadwinner instead of that of wife and mother. These children, far more often than those from normal two-parent families, have problems in school, turn to drugs, become involved in crime, and marry, divorce, and remarry repeatedly. What a terribly successful ploy the devil has used in redefining love <\/em>to mean lust and sex and thus to advance his evil aims.<\/span><\/p>\n Love Does Not Give License to Sin or Freedom from Law <\/em><\/strong><\/span><\/p>\n \u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0 A large block of U.S. citizenry, led principally by some young people on college campuses, began openly defying authority, law, and established moral principles in the 1960s. Such people despise any limits of their behavior. One justification they offer for their philosophy is to drag love <\/em>down from its high and lofty perch to serve their low and sorry goal. Psychologists have pandered to and encouraged these authority-haters. Many parents now excuse their utter lack of discipline because they \u201clove Johnny too much to make him mind\u201d or they \u201clove little Susie too much to punish or set limits for her.\u201d<\/span><\/p>\n \u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0 In like manner, preachers and elders sometimes say that they \u201clove\u201d their brethren too much to rebuke and correct them. Theologically, many are advancing the idea that God\u2019s love for us cancels His law for us and that these are somehow antagonistic to one another. They admit that God\u2019s people in the Old Testament had to keep the law He gave through Moses, but they argue: \u201cWe\u2019re under grace, rather than the law.\u201d If they were speaking only of the Law of Moses, we could not agree more, for it was given only to Israelites. But its authority even over the Jews died when the Lord was nailed to the cross (Col. 2:14).<\/span><\/p>\n \u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0 Men in every age have always been accountable to the law of God. Rather than the withholding of discipline\u2019s being a sign of love<\/strong>, it is the very opposite: \u201cHe that spareth his rod hateth his son; But he that loveth him chasteneth him betimes\u201d (Pro. 13:24). Therefore, children are commanded to obey their parents, and parents (led by the father) are to nurture and admonish their children in the Lord, which includes teaching them to obey (Eph. 6:1\u20134). The Lord \u201cchastens\u201d and \u201cscourges\u201d His children from time to time because He loves us (Heb. 12:6). The Bible also teaches that the faithful are to reprove and rebuke those who despise the Truth (2 Tim. 4:2\u20134).<\/span><\/p>\n \u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0 The New Testament nowhere teaches that, this side of the cross, we are without law from God. It rather teaches the opposite. Only false teachers, whether through ignorance or deliberation, would dare assert that God\u2019s love has freed men from accountability to law. Such antinomians that teach this damnable doctrine often flee to Romans 6:14: \u201cfor ye are not under law, but under grace.\u201d This statement cannot mean that men are under no law, but rather are under grace alone, for only a little later in this same letter, Paul wrote, referring to the Gospel: \u201cThe law <\/strong>of the Spirit of life in Christ Jesus made me free from the law of sin and death\u201d (8:2, emph. DM). Furthermore, if grace eliminates law, it also logically and practically eliminates sin: \u201cBut where there is no law, neither is there transgression\u201d (Rom. 4:15). Since the need for grace is predicated upon the existence of sin (5:20b), if there is no sin, there is no need for grace. Thus, those who would obliterate law, logically obliterate both sin and grace in one fell swoop.<\/span><\/p>\n \u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0 What is the meaning of Romans 6:14? In this statement Paul used a literary device in which one denies one element in order to emphasize another. Thus the sense is: \u201cFor ye are not under law [alone], but [also] under grace.\u201d John used the same device in a passage earlier noted: \u201cMy Little children, let us not love in word [alone], neither with the tongue [alone]; but [also] in deed and truth\u201d (1 John 3:18). If we were absolutely and exclusively under grace, then all men would be saved unconditionally: \u201cFor the grace of God hath appeared, bringing salvation to all men\u201d (Tit. 2:11).<\/span><\/p>\n \u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0 If Paul meant in Romans 6:14 that we are absolutely free from law, then he directly contradicted himself when he wrote that he was \u201cunder law to Christ\u201d (1 Cor. 9:21) and that we must \u201cfulfill the law of Christ\u201d (Gal 6:2). Furthermore, James described the Gospel as \u201cthe perfect law of liberty\u201d (1:25).<\/span><\/p>\n \u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0 We will do well to notice that our love for God and His Son is measured and demonstrated by our obedience to Their Law:<\/span><\/p>\n If ye love me, ye will keep my commandments…. He that hath my commandments, and keepeth them, he it is that loveth me: and he that loveth me shall be loved of my Father, and I will love him, and will manifest myself unto him…. Jesus answered and said unto him, If a man love me, he will keep my word: and my Father will love him, and we will come unto him, and make our abode with him. He that loveth me not keepeth not my words: and the word which ye hear is not mine, but the Father\u2019s who sent me (John 14:15, 21, 23\u201324).<\/span><\/p><\/blockquote>\n \u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0 John repeated this great principle: \u201cFor this is the love of God, that we keep his commandments: and his commandments are not grievous\u201d (1 John 5:3). Whatever love is<\/strong>, it most certainly does not <\/strong>free us from obeying God\u2019s law and commandments, nor does it give us license to sin or adopt the fatal and fallacious philosophy of situation ethics. May the learning of what love is not <\/strong>help us understand what it is<\/strong>.<\/span><\/p>\n The Definition of Love<\/strong><\/span><\/p>\n \u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0 Love <\/em>in the \u201cfruit of the Spirit\u201d translates the Greek noun agape. <\/em>This word is by far the most frequently occurring \u201clove\u201d word in the New Testament, appearing 116 times. The verb form, agapao<\/em>, appears an additional 142 times. The agape <\/em>family of Greek words represents the very highest concept of love. This word conveys the idea of seeking the best for others, with or without affection for them, and whether or not they are worthy of our benevolent attitudes and actions. This love arises not from the worthiness of its recipient, but from the benevolent nature of its giver. Thus God loved <\/strong>wicked and sinful men although they were completely unworthy and He certainly did not like <\/strong>them or approve of their conduct (John 3:16). Agape <\/em>is basically an act of the will that can be commanded (John 13:34; Eph. 5:25; 1 John 3:23; et al.), rather than a spontaneous emotional response of the heart, which no man can command. W.E. Vine describes agape <\/em>love as follows:<\/span><\/p>\n Christian love, whether exercised toward the brethren, or toward men generally, is not an impulse from the feelings, it does not always run with the natural inclinations, nor does it spend itself only upon those for whom some affinity is discovered….5<\/sup><\/span><\/p><\/blockquote>\n \u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0 \u00a0\u00a0 Paul gives us the fullest treatment of the meaning of agape <\/em>in 1 Corinthians 13:1\u20138. Ironically, he did so, not as an isolated definition of the word or as an essay designed to explain the concept, but in the process of correcting the attitudes and behaviors of the Corinthian saints regarding the exercise of miraculous spiritual gifts. From reading 1 Corinthians 12\u201314, it is evident that Paul therein addressed and sought to correct serious tensions among some of the Corinthians relating to these gifts. Apparently, those who possessed the gift of tongues acted as if this were the superior gift and were flaunting it (13:1; 14:1\u201325). They were promoting themselves as being especially important because they possessed this gift. This unloving and unspiritual behavior seems to have moved some to envy and jealousy. Paul\u2019s discussion and description of love are against the backdrop of this dissension, and the characteristics of love he presents are likely, at least in some cases, pointers to the unloving behavior these brethren were manifesting toward each other in this controversy.<\/span><\/p>\n \u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0 The spiritual gifts were exceedingly important in the process of bringing the church through its \u201cchildhood\u201d period and in keeping it pure until the completed revelation could be written down for all perpetuity (1 Cor. 13:8\u201312; 14:1\u20135, 22b Heb. 2:3\u20134). Paul first discussed the one source of the many gifts (the Holy Spirit), second, the necessity of maintaining unity among themselves in light of this single source, and third, the importance to the body of those members often considered least significant (1 Cor. 12:1\u201327).<\/span><\/p>\n \u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0 He then directed their attention to the universally available attribute of love and identified it as more significant than the Spirit\u2019s miraculous powers over which they were quarrelling (12:28\u201313:2). Love is so important that, if one should give all that he had to the poor and offer his body as a burnt offering, but did so from some motive other than love, he would not be rewarded thereby (v.3).<\/span><\/p>\n \u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0 The apostle makes it clear from these powerful illustrations that love\u2014the first-named part of the fruit of the Holy Spirit\u2014is so honorable, beautiful, and powerful that it is absolutely indispensable. Thus interestingly, this common \u201cfruit of the Spirit\u201d exceeds in importance any spectacular \u201cgift of the Spirit.\u201d<\/strong>6 With the foregoing material for perspective, in verses 4\u20138 Paul lays out his description of the way love causes one to behave. He personifies love, whereby we see it in action and in its practical application in daily life. He declared that love…<\/span><\/p>\n\n
\n
\n
\n
\n
\n