Loving Thy Neighbor as Thyself The Divine Command to Love Beyond Affection, Agreement, and Personal Convenience Introduction: The Command That Reveals the Hea Santaaria

 

Loving Thy Neighbor as Thyself

The Divine Command to Love Beyond Affection, Agreement, and Personal Convenience

Introduction: The Command That Reveals the Heart

Loving Thy Neighbor While Defending the Truth

An Old School Baptist Examination of Christian Love, Absolute Predestination, Doctrinal Faithfulness, and Separation from Error

Introduction: Love and Truth Are Not Enemies

One of the most serious misunderstandings concerning Christian love is the assumption that loving our neighbor requires us to overlook doctrinal error, abandon religious convictions, or maintain fellowship with those whose teachings contradict the revealed Word of God.

From an Old School Baptist perspective, nothing could be further from the truth.

Jesus Christ commanded:

"Thou shalt love thy neighbour as thyself." — Matthew 22:39

Yet the same Savior declared:

"If ye love me, keep my commandments." — John 14:15

These commandments do not contradict one another. Love toward our neighbor and obedience to God belong together. Indeed, genuine Christian love must be governed by divine truth rather than by human sentiment.

The Old School Baptist commitment to God's sovereignty, eternal election, predestination, particular redemption, regeneration by the immediate operation of the Holy Spirit, and separation from doctrinal error must therefore be understood alongside the command to love our neighbor.

The question is not whether Christians should love others or defend the truth. Scripture requires both.

The more difficult question is how believers can faithfully maintain doctrinal convictions, oppose teachings they regard as erroneous, and practice ecclesiastical separation without surrendering the spirit of charity commanded by Jesus Christ.

Christian love does not require doctrinal compromise, and doctrinal faithfulness does not authorize personal hatred.

This distinction is foundational to a proper understanding of the subject.

1. The Sovereignty of God and the Duty of Christian Love

Old School Baptists have historically emphasized that salvation originates entirely in the sovereign grace of God.

The apostle Paul declares:

"According as he hath chosen us in him before the foundation of the world, that we should be holy and without blame before him in love." — Ephesians 1:4

This passage establishes an important relationship between election and love.

God did not choose His people because they first loved Him or demonstrated superior moral character. His choice preceded their existence and originated in His eternal purpose.

Nevertheless, the apostle connects that choice with holiness and love.

Divine election is not presented as permission to despise others or disregard God's commandments.

On the contrary, those who have received spiritual life are instructed to conduct themselves in a manner consistent with their calling.

Colossians 3:12–14 declares:

"Put on therefore, as the elect of God, holy and beloved, bowels of mercies, kindness, humbleness of mind, meekness, longsuffering; Forbearing one another, and forgiving one another, if any man have a quarrel against any."

Paul continues by identifying charity as the bond of perfectness.

Notice the connection.

The elect are commanded to demonstrate mercy.

Those chosen by grace are instructed to exercise humility.

Those loved by God are called to love others.

Election supplies no foundation for spiritual arrogance. It provides a powerful reason for humility.

A believer who recognizes that his salvation is wholly undeserved has no legitimate reason to regard himself as inherently superior to another human being.

His doctrinal convictions may differ profoundly from those of his neighbor, but he must remember that every spiritual blessing he possesses originated in divine mercy.

2. Defending the Doctrine of Predestination Is Consistent with Love

The doctrine of predestination has historically occupied a central place within Old School Baptist theology.

Ephesians 1:11 declares:

"In whom also we have obtained an inheritance, being predestinated according to the purpose of him who worketh all things after the counsel of his own will."

Romans 8:29–30 presents God's foreknowledge, predestination, calling, justification, and glorification as parts of His saving purpose.

These passages establish that eternal salvation rests upon the purpose and accomplishment of God rather than the independent decisions or merits of fallen humanity.

Within Old School Baptist history, however, disagreements have arisen concerning the precise extent and operation of predestination.

Some have maintained an absolute predestination of all things, including the events of time, while carefully distinguishing God's holy purpose from the sinful motives and actions of creatures.

Others have affirmed unconditional election and the certainty of redemption while rejecting the proposition that all sinful acts fall under predestination in the same sense as saving events.

This distinction is important because Old School Baptists have not spoken with one voice on every question concerning the divine decrees.

Nevertheless, those who hold the doctrine of absolute predestination believe that God's sovereign purpose comprehends all events and that nothing occurs independently of His eternal counsel.

They also insist, when carefully expressing the doctrine, that God's sovereignty must never be interpreted as making Him morally guilty of sin.

James 1:13 declares that God cannot be tempted with evil and does not tempt any man.

The doctrinal problem therefore demands careful distinctions between divine sovereignty, human responsibility, providence, and moral causation.

To defend predestination is not to deny love; it is to defend what its adherents understand Scripture to reveal concerning the sovereignty of God.

Yet the manner of that defense remains subject to the commandments of Christ.

A believer may firmly reject an opposing theological position without ridiculing, humiliating, or despising the person who holds it.

Second Timothy 2:24–25 provides direct instruction:

"And the servant of the Lord must not strive; but be gentle unto all men, apt to teach, patient, In meekness instructing those that oppose themselves."

The apostle does not command the minister to abandon truth.

He commands him to defend and teach it with patience and meekness.

The stronger our conviction that knowledge of divine truth depends upon God's gracious illumination, the less justification we possess for treating those who disagree with us contemptuously.

3. Loving Our Neighbor Does Not Require Fellowship with His Errors

A central principle of Old School Baptist ecclesiology is that Christian fellowship must rest upon the truth and order of the gospel.

Second John 9–11 warns against receiving or endorsing those who do not abide in the doctrine of Christ.

Romans 16:17 instructs believers:

"Now I beseech you, brethren, mark them which cause divisions and offences contrary to the doctrine which ye have learned; and avoid them."

These passages show that the New Testament recognizes circumstances in which separation from false teaching is necessary.

However, the context and application of such passages require careful consideration.

Not every disagreement carries the same doctrinal significance.

A difference concerning a secondary interpretation does not necessarily justify the same response as a denial of the deity of Christ, His resurrection, or salvation by grace.

Similarly, separation from a religious organization does not require hostility toward every individual associated with it.

A Primitive Baptist may conscientiously refuse ecclesiastical fellowship with a minister or congregation whose doctrines he believes contradict the apostolic gospel.

Yet he remains obligated to act justly, speak truthfully, and demonstrate compassion toward those individuals.

Separation concerns the boundaries of religious fellowship.

Love concerns the moral duty owed to other human beings.

The two obligations are not identical.

We may refuse to endorse a person's doctrine while remaining sincerely concerned for his welfare.

In fact, love may require us to explain why we believe a doctrine is erroneous.

If we sincerely believe that a religious teaching misrepresents the character of God or obscures the gospel, indifference toward that teaching would not necessarily demonstrate love.

Nevertheless, correction must proceed from conviction and benevolence rather than personal resentment.

4. The Difference Between Doctrinal Separation and Personal Hatred

It is possible to separate from error for righteous reasons.

It is also possible to use doctrinal separation as a disguise for pride, bitterness, resentment, or personal hostility.

Scripture requires believers to distinguish between these motives.

Paul declares in Ephesians 4:31–32:

"Let all bitterness, and wrath, and anger, and clamour, and evil speaking, be put away from you, with all malice: And be ye kind one to another, tenderhearted, forgiving one another, even as God for Christ's sake hath forgiven you."

These instructions do not contain an exception for theological disputes.

The Christian is not permitted to cultivate bitterness merely because his opponent teaches an erroneous doctrine.

Nor does opposition to doctrinal error justify false accusations or deliberately distorted representations of another person's beliefs.

An Old School Baptist committed to defending the doctrine of predestination should be especially careful to represent opposing positions accurately.

If he disagrees with a Conditional Time Salvation advocate, a Means Baptist, or a minister who rejects absolute predestination, he should explain the actual disagreement rather than attribute to his opponent views that the opponent does not hold.

The same principle applies to controversies concerning the extent of predestination, the responsibility of sinners, the gospel ministry, and the relationship between eternal salvation and temporal obedience.

A person may be wrong without being dishonest.

He may sincerely misunderstand a passage of Scripture.

He may possess genuine spiritual life while holding theological views that another believer considers seriously mistaken.

The apostle's injunction to speak the truth in love applies even in heated doctrinal controversy.

The pursuit of doctrinal purity must never become an excuse for abandoning ordinary Christian integrity.

5. Predestination Does Not Eliminate Human Responsibility

One of the most important questions concerns the relationship between God's sovereign predestination and the commandments addressed to His creatures.

If God has predestinated all things according to His eternal purpose, why command believers to love their neighbors?

Why rebuke hatred, envy, and cruelty?

Why urge ministers to defend the truth?

Why require churches to separate from error?

The answer involves a distinction between God's eternal purpose and the moral obligations revealed in His Word.

Deuteronomy 29:29 declares:

"The secret things belong unto the LORD our God: but those things which are revealed belong unto us and to our children for ever, that we may do all the words of this law."

The Christian's responsibility is not to discover the hidden details of God's eternal counsel and then use them to excuse disobedience.

His responsibility is to obey the revealed commandments of God.

Even among advocates of absolute predestination, careful theologians have distinguished God's sovereign ordering of events from His moral approval of human conduct.

The existence of sin within God's providential government does not make sin righteous.

The certainty of an event does not excuse the sinful intentions of those who participate in it.

Consider the crucifixion of Christ.

Acts 2:23 declares that Jesus was delivered according to the determinate counsel and foreknowledge of God, yet Peter simultaneously identifies those who crucified Him as responsible for wicked actions.

The divine purpose and human guilt are both affirmed.

This distinction is profoundly relevant to Christian love.

A believer must never reason that because an offense occurred under divine providence, he is therefore free to entertain resentment or retaliate against the offender.

Nor may a person claim that his own unkindness was predestinated and therefore cannot be condemned.

Such reasoning confuses God's sovereign purpose with human moral duty.

The doctrine of predestination must never be employed to overthrow the commandments of the very God whose sovereignty it seeks to defend.

6. The Good Samaritan and Doctrinal Separation

The parable of the Good Samaritan provides a particularly important example.

In Luke 10:25–37, Jesus describes a Samaritan who assisted a wounded Jewish traveler after a priest and a Levite had passed him by.

The religious differences between Jews and Samaritans were substantial.

Nevertheless, Jesus made the Samaritan the example of neighborly mercy.

The parable does not teach that all religious differences are meaningless.

It does not require believers to surrender their convictions concerning proper worship.

It does not establish unrestricted ecclesiastical fellowship among conflicting religious bodies.

Rather, it demonstrates that religious differences do not cancel the duty of compassion.

The wounded man's need was not dependent upon his theological agreement with the Samaritan.

His suffering created an opportunity for mercy.

The lesson applies directly to Old School Baptists.

A Primitive Baptist may believe that another denomination teaches serious errors concerning salvation, the ministry, or church order.

He may therefore decline to participate in its religious ordinances.

Nevertheless, if a member of that denomination is suffering, hungry, homeless, or otherwise in genuine need, the command to love our neighbor remains.

The Samaritan did not compromise his religious convictions by treating the wounded man with compassion.

Mercy toward another person is not necessarily endorsement of that person's doctrine.

This distinction allows Old School Baptists to maintain their ecclesiastical convictions while faithfully demonstrating the charity commanded by Christ.

7. The Defense of Truth Must Proceed from Love

Paul declares in 1 Corinthians 13:6 that charity:

"Rejoiceth not in iniquity, but rejoiceth in the truth."

This statement makes it impossible to separate genuine Christian love entirely from truth.

Love does not delight in falsehood.

Love does not celebrate unrighteousness.

Love does not require believers to remain silent when the gospel is misrepresented.

Yet Paul also warns that knowledge can become a source of pride.

First Corinthians 8:1 states:

"Knowledge puffeth up, but charity edifieth."

A person may possess substantial biblical knowledge and nevertheless employ that knowledge in a manner that injures rather than edifies.

This danger is especially serious in religious controversy.

A minister may become more concerned with defeating his opponents than instructing his hearers.

A writer may devote greater attention to exposing another person's errors than to explaining the beauty of the truth.

A congregation may become so absorbed in maintaining its identity through opposition that it neglects the positive duties of Christian fellowship.

Old School Baptist faithfulness requires more than the rejection of error.

It requires the proclamation of God's grace, the edification of His children, and obedience to His commandments.

The ministry of truth should therefore possess a constructive purpose.

Its object is not merely to establish that others are mistaken, but to declare what Scripture teaches concerning the glory of God and the salvation accomplished by Jesus Christ.

8. Brotherly Love Does Not Abolish Church Discipline

The New Testament requires churches to exercise discipline in appropriate circumstances.

Matthew 18:15–17 provides instructions concerning offenses among brethren.

First Corinthians 5 addresses serious moral disorder within the congregation.

Titus 3:10 speaks of rejecting a divisive person after appropriate admonition.

These passages demonstrate that love does not necessarily require maintaining unrestricted fellowship.

Indeed, discipline may sometimes be an expression of concern for the spiritual welfare of the congregation and the individual being corrected.

Nevertheless, discipline must be exercised according to scriptural principles rather than personal resentment.

Its purpose should not be humiliation or revenge.

Paul's treatment of the disciplined offender in 2 Corinthians 2:6–8 is especially instructive. He urges the congregation to forgive, comfort, and reaffirm its love toward the person, lest he be overwhelmed by excessive sorrow.

This passage reminds us that separation and discipline are not ends in themselves.

They serve the interests of truth, order, repentance, and spiritual welfare.

The Old School Baptist tradition has frequently emphasized maintaining a disciplined church.

But discipline must remain subject to the commandments of Christ.

A church that maintains doctrinal boundaries while cultivating personal cruelty has not thereby fulfilled all its obligations.

Purity of doctrine and holiness of conduct must be pursued together.

9. The Love of the Brethren as Evidence of Regeneration

First John 3:14 declares:

"We know that we have passed from death unto life, because we love the brethren."

This passage is particularly important within Old School Baptist theology.

John does not declare that love causes spiritual regeneration.

He declares that love provides evidence that the passage from death unto life has already occurred.

The distinction accords with the Old School Baptist conviction that regeneration is the sovereign work of the Holy Spirit rather than the product of human obedience.

Nevertheless, the love described by John possesses practical consequences.

It cannot be reduced to affection for those who agree with every detail of one's theology.

First John particularly emphasizes love for the brethren, while the wider teaching of Scripture establishes obligations of kindness and mercy toward all people.

Believers must therefore distinguish between the special spiritual relationship existing among God's children and the universal moral duty owed to their neighbors.

A Christian may recognize another person as a recipient of divine grace while remaining unable to participate in ecclesiastical fellowship with him because of serious doctrinal differences.

The distinction between spiritual brotherhood and organized church fellowship has been important in various Old School Baptist discussions.

Yet such recognition should produce humility rather than indifference.

We should not automatically conclude that everyone outside our particular religious fellowship is devoid of spiritual life.

The sovereign operations of the Holy Spirit are not confined to the visible boundaries of one congregation or association.

This principle is especially important for a tradition that emphasizes that regeneration is accomplished immediately by God.

10. God's Grace Should Humble the Defender of Predestination

Perhaps the greatest moral implication of unconditional election is humility.

Paul asks in 1 Corinthians 4:7:

"For who maketh thee to differ from another? and what hast thou that thou didst not receive?"

If every spiritual blessing is received by grace, boasting is excluded.

The believer possesses no independent merit by which he can claim superiority over others.

His knowledge of divine truth is itself a blessing for which he should thank God.

Therefore, the defender of predestination should never employ that doctrine as a foundation for personal arrogance.

It would be a tragic contradiction to defend sovereign grace while behaving as though one's spiritual understanding were an achievement deserving personal glory.

Likewise, it would be inconsistent to insist that salvation rests entirely upon divine mercy while showing no mercy toward others.

The doctrine of grace should produce gratitude.

Gratitude should produce humility.

Humility should influence our treatment of our neighbors.

A believer may be uncompromising in his conviction that salvation is entirely of the Lord and yet gentle in his treatment of those who disagree.

He may contend earnestly for the faith without becoming contentious in spirit.

He may separate from doctrinal error without rejoicing in the misfortunes of those who teach it.

Such conduct does not weaken his testimony.

It demonstrates that his doctrinal convictions govern his life as well as his arguments.

Conclusion: Faithful to Truth, Faithful to Love

Old School Baptist theology does not require a choice between loving our neighbor and defending the doctrines of God's sovereign grace.

Scripture requires both.

The believer must not sacrifice truth merely to preserve outward harmony.

Neither may he sacrifice love in the name of defending truth.

Predestination does not abolish responsibility.

Election does not authorize pride.

Separation does not justify hatred.

Church discipline does not permit revenge.

And doctrinal soundness does not excuse an unchristian spirit.

The same apostle who declared that God works all things according to the counsel of His own will also commanded believers to exercise kindness, humility, forgiveness, and love.

These obligations belong to the same system of divine truth.

From the standpoint of Old School Baptist doctrine, genuine Christian love originates in the gracious work of God. It is not the meritorious cause of regeneration but one of its spiritual fruits.

Yet the child of God must continually be instructed to exercise that love in practical obedience.

The defense of absolute predestination, particular redemption, immediate regeneration, and the proper order of the church must therefore proceed in a manner consistent with the character of Christ.

There are times when fidelity to Scripture requires separation.

There are times when error must be exposed.

There are times when fellowship cannot be maintained without compromising deeply held convictions.

But there is never a time when God authorizes His children to abandon the moral obligation to treat their neighbors justly and compassionately.

The genuine defender of sovereign grace should be uncompromising concerning the truth of God, humble concerning his own understanding, charitable toward those who disagree, and faithful to every commandment of Christ.

The final principle is simple but searching:

We must never compromise truth in the name of love, nor violate love in the name of truth.

As the apostle Paul declared:

"But speaking the truth in love, may grow up into him in all things, which is the head, even Christ." — Ephesians 4:15