Ecumenical interpretation of the “commandment to love” Matthew 22

Deutsch

The liberal theological interpretation of the Gospel aims at compatibility with ecumenism. An example is the “commandment of love” of Jesus Christ. A modern interpretation that completely ignores the essentials and tries to lead believers in a completely wrong direction.

Isolated view of love

“He came and brought love with him,” is an introductory headline from the ranks of liberal-modern theologians on the interpretation of the so-called “love commandment” of Jesus Christ. The most important commandment, according to Jesus Christ, is love for God and love for one’s neighbors. A statement that comes at the right time for the advocates of ecumenism if one only looks at it in isolation and simply ignores the background of the path of salvation according to the Gospel.

The first and greatest commandment

At the center of the interpretation is the “first and greatest commandment” formulated by Jesus Christ himself, according to Matthew 22:37-40 (King James Version):
“Jesus said unto him, Thou shalt love the Lord thy God with all thy heart, and with all thy soul, and with all thy mind. This is the first and great commandment. And the second is like unto it, Thou shalt love thy neighbour as thyself. On these two commandments hang all the law and the prophets.“

The love of God

Modern liberal theologians see this statement of Jesus Christ as containing the following messages and characteristics:
“Love God with your whole personality -> your thinking, feeling, talent”
and
“Love God with your life force -> With all your energy, with everything you do”
This can certainly be left as it is. Life is aligned with the will of God. This includes thoughts as well as the use of talents and vital energy in the service of God’s work.

A further derivation from Jesus’ “commandment to love”, however, is very problematic.
“Love God with all your senses -> With your taste, hearing, sight, touch, smell“.
What is that supposed to be? Love God with your tongue, with your ears, with your eyes, with your fingers and with your nose? Since this is not possible in practice, it can only be an imagination, in its purest form. Some call it “Ignatian exercises”, others “contemplative meditation”, and this area is somewhere between esotericism, spiritualism and Far Eastern philosophy, but certainly not in the area of ​​the gospel. Such ambitions are not to be found in the entire Bible, not even in the beginning.

“What is true charity? -> Absolute selflessness, free from egoism, impartiality”
This is also a statement that is certainly true. All characteristics that are unfortunately only very rarely found in this world.

The liberal insight gained

The summary of the “Love Commandment of Jesus” obtained by “modern theology” is:
“Jesus died for me, even though I am a sinner, because he loves me selflessly!“

A statement that burns under the fingernails and definitely has the potential to lead people in a completely wrong direction. Because this means that the core of the path to salvation is removed and God’s love is highlighted in isolation in an “ecumenism compliant” way. The “gospel-compliant” result should actually be:
“Jesus died for me because I am a sinner and because of His selfless love for us, He accepted His sacrificial death!“

If man were not a sinner, then Jesus Christ would never have had to die, or there would be no reason for it. Jesus’ sacrificial death was primarily necessary to provide us sinful humans with a path to salvation (Info). In doing so, God also demonstrated His love for His creation. John 3:14-16:
“And as Moses lifted up the serpent in the wilderness, even so must the Son of man be lifted up: That whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but have eternal life. For God so loved the world, that he gave his only begotten Son, that whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but have everlasting life.“

Unfallen man recognized God’s love through His creation and sinful man is also able to recognize God’s love through His creation (see Romans 1:20). The death of Jesus Christ would have been completely unnecessary for the simple proof of love. No, not although man is a sinner, but because man is a sinner, Jesus Christ died instead of sinful men. And He did this because of His love. Jesus Christ came as the light of the world (John 1:4-5), with himself, he also brought love with him.

Another “ecumenical peculiarity” is the claim that Jesus Christ came into the world to bring peace. He certainly came to save the world, but not through a “loving universal redemption”, but to make people recognize their sins and move them to repentance. To do this, Jesus Christ neither threw teddy bears nor painted hearts on the walls everywhere along His path, but rather he took the (spiritual) sword in his hand, Matthew 10:34-35:
“Think not that I am come to send peace on earth: I came not to send peace, but a sword. For I am come to set a man at variance against his father, and the daughter against her mother, and the daughter in law against her mother in law.“

A hair’s breadth of denial of Jesus Christ

This liberal theological derivation or interpretation of Jesus’ “commandment to love” according to Matthew 26 literally smells of ecumenism. Here only the compatibility of God’s love with other religions is established, but the exclusive and therefore “ecumenically hostile” path of salvation (John 14:6) via Jesus Christ remains completely ignored. The gospel statement, derived from “modern theology,” suggests an “all-redeeming” love of God. The sin itself and its consequences appear irrelevant.

Das “Jesus’ commandment to love” is not a replacement for God’s laws. True love for God and one’s neighbors automatically results in observance of the commandments (Info). If one were to follow the liberal-ecumenical interpretation, then only a small step would be necessary to completely deny Jesus Christ and His sacrifice for our sins.

Bible verses from King James Version