Rev. Jospeh Spurgeon (Hereinafter JS) writes,

Where we fundamentally part ways is that you collapse categories that Scripture keeps distinct.

The Bible teaches that sin is universal in Adam. It does not locate the primary engine of evil in one people group. It does not teach that one ethnos functions as a kind of ongoing, central delivery mechanism of satanic opposition.

BLMc responds,

1.) I categorically deny that I am collapsing categories that Scripture keeps distinct.

2.) I admit that in Adam’s fall, we fell all. Indeed, I subscribe to it.

3.) I also affirm that some people groups can excel in wickedness over other people groups. To put it another way, I do affirm that there can be such a thing as people groups who are senior Devil agents compared to other people groups who can be junior Devil agents. The Bagels have a long and storied history of opposing Christ and therefore, I follow the Holy Spirit who said that,

Acts 7:51 “You stiff-necked people! Your hearts and ears are still uncircumcised. You are just like your ancestors: You always resist the Holy Spirit! 52 Was there ever a prophet your ancestors did not persecute? They even killed those who predicted the coming of the Righteous One. And now you have betrayed and murdered him—

And again,

II Thess. 2:14 For you, brothers and sisters, became imitators of God’s churches in Judea, which are in Christ Jesus: You suffered from your own people the same things those churches suffered from the Jews 15 who killed the Lord Jesus and the prophets and also drove us out. They displease God and are hostile to everyone 16 in their effort to keep us from speaking to the Gentiles so that they may be saved. In this way they always heap up their sins to the limit. The wrath of God has come upon them at last.

We see here, Joe, that just as Cretans per Paul, had dispositional sins that meant that they excelled at certain sins over other people groups, so the Bagels have a disposition of excelling at rejecting Christ. Now, this does not mean that individual Bagels can’t be redeemed by a graciousness that is beyond their treachery but it does mean that they are to be considered Senior rebels who excell at rebelling against the Lord and His Messiah.

JS writes,

On the question of neighbor, you have repeatedly avoided the clear teaching of our own tradition. John Calvin explicitly states that the Good Samaritan teaches that every man is our neighbor, precisely because all men are made in the image of God. He says this plainly and repeatedly. The Reformed tradition does not restrict the definition of neighbor to tribe or kin. It affirms ordered love, yes, but not restricted love.

Bret responds,

Joe, if there are differing degrees of neighborliness, which our Reformed Fathers taught, then all men are not our neighbors in the same way and in the same sense. As such to say “All men are our neighbors” apart from any of the kind clear qualifications that we find in the quote below from the Puritans Willard and Winthrop is a significant confusion that will lead people astray in their thinking in an area that has become overwhelmingly important in the ongoing replacement enterprise that WASPs are experiencing,

“There are diverse degrees of Neighborhood. The word ‘neighbor’ is very (comprehensive); it comprehends in it all with whom we may have any civil (Communion) and so the greatest and strangest, and (all) of men. And it involves all the several (nations) and religions. So, in this respect, some may be our nearer neighbors than others. A brother is nearer than a stranger, etc. Hence, there are necessary degrees of the Law. That we are to love all equally alike is asserted, and from (variance) of the relations with God hath (created) among men unto which are to be discharged by a special love one to another. Hence Psalm 16:3, ‘But to the saints that are in the earth, and to the excellent, in whom is all my delight.’ There are some who we ought to be more concerned for than others.”

Samuel Willard
Puritan
Body of Divinity – pgs. 584-585

“We are not bound to exercise mercy to others to the ruin of ourselves.”

John Winthrop

Life and Letters of John Winthrop – p. 183

So, we see at times ordered love is restricted love in the sense that the word “love” has come to be used in our modern lexicon.

JS writes,

I believe in ordo amoris. I also believe the Scriptures call us to love those whom God places in our path, including those outside our immediate circle.

Bret responds,

But here everything hinges on what the word “love” means. Everything also hinges on understanding that one cannot love others to the ruin of ourselves or our kith and kin as Winthrop states above. So, I believe I am to love those God places in our path and my wife and I have lived that out. Several years ago we took in a homeless 21 year old professing Christian. It’s a long story but out of a sense of the requirement to “love” the least of these we took him in and gave him a home. I mention this only to distance myself from any accusation that I’m a cold hearted-bastard.

JS writes,

I have read Luther and Chrysostom on the Jews. I agree with much of what they said, especially in their historical contexts. Chrysostom, for example, was addressing a version of Hebrew roots movement in his day. But neither Chrysostom nor Luther made the Jews the central explanatory category for evil in the world. They spoke strongly, at times sharply, but they did not replace the biblical doctrine of sin with an ethnically centered framework.

Bret responds,

I strongly recommend that you read Calvin’s booklet “Response to questions and objections of a certain Bagel.” You can find it online.

Again, I say unto you, I am NOT denying that in Adam’s fall we fell all. I am affirming that some people groups excel at rebellion against the magnificent Lord Christ. Bagels are the Senior Rebels among all the people groups. Keep in mind that our Master said of the Bagels, “you are of your Father, the Devil, he was a murderer from the beginning. When he lies he speaks his native tongue.” As bad as the Cretans were as we see in Titus 1, this is pointed and direct ethnic language.

JS writes,

The issue is not whether Jews can be enemies of Christ. Of course they can and often are. So can Gentiles. So can anyone in rebellion against God. The issue is whether you elevate one group into a kind of ongoing, defining category for understanding evil itself.

BLMc responds,

I don’t think I can make my position any clearer than I have above.

JS writes,

The enemy is not flesh and blood in that sense. The enemy is sin, the world, and the devil. And those realities cut across every tribe, tongue, and nation.

BLMc responds,

I quite agree … and in some people group more than others. Also, in some people groups with different expressive dynamics than others. (Hence the Cretans.)

JS writes,

So no, I am not denying that evil works itself out concretely. Nor am I in support of Judaism, dispensationalism, or egalitarianism.

BLMc

Hmmm…. I’m pretty sure we still disagree on these fronts.

JS writes,

Let’s narrow this to the question of neighbor, because that’s where you continue to avoid a clear answer.

BLMc responds,

You keep on using that phrase “you have avoided giving a clear answer.” I do not think that means what you think that means.

I have been consistently clear. It is only your cognitive dissonance that accounts for your inability to read my clarity.

JS,

Do you agree with Calvin that every man is our neighbor because every man is made in the image of God?

That is the question.

BLMc responds,

One cannot consistently say “every man is my neighbor,” and then turn around and suggest that there are different degrees of neighborliness. Every man can’t be my neighbor in the same sense if it is true that there are different degrees of neighborliness.

One must find other words for “neighbor” if one is going to insist that there are vastly differing degrees of neighbor that differing “neighbors” correspond to. This is like saying all people are hockey players but some people don’t skate.

So, if you allow me to define the different degrees of neighbor — the different neighborly ways that some neighbor people can be treated than other neighbor people than fine … “all people are neighbors.” BUT, you and I are importing different meaning into that word and so we are not really agreed, are we?

JS writes,

You keep appealing to degrees of love and responsibility. I have already affirmed that. Of course there are degrees. A man has greater obligations to his wife than to a stranger. We are limited in our time, resources, and responsibilities. No one is denying that.

BLMc responds,

Great… so we agree that not all neighbors are treated the same therefore the appeal to “treating everyone like a neighbor” tells no one anything of any concrete value.

JS writes,

But that is not the issue.

BLMc

Ummm… yeah, that kind of is the issue.

JS writes,

The issue is whether the category “neighbor” is universal or restricted.

BLMc

Joe … if everyone is fast, then no one is fast. If everyone is my friend then no one is my friend.

If everyone is my neighbor then no one is my neighbor.

Do you understand this concept?

JS writes,

Calvin says it is universal. Every man is our neighbor. The degrees come in how we discharge our duties, not in who qualifies as neighbor.

BLMc responds,

Sigh

Right … every man is my neighbor therefore no one is my neighbor.

We are the world
We are the children
We are the ones who make a brighter day
So, let’s start giving
There’s a choice we’re making
We’re saving our own lives
It’s true we’ll make a better day
Just you and me

JS writes,

You continue to blur that distinction.

BLMc

LOL … and you continue to not get it.

JS writes,

Now, to be clear, I do agree with you in part. Scripture itself recognizes that different peoples can have characteristic sins. Paul says as much about the Cretans. History shows that different nations can, at times, excel in particular forms of wickedness. That is not controversial.

And yes, there are times when certain individuals or groups act as more immediate or intense enemies of Christ and His people. That also is not controversial.

BLMc

There’s nothing I like more than the smell of a lack of controversy in the morning.

JS writes,

But none of that justifies redefining the category of neighbor or treating some people as though they fall outside of it.

BLMc responds,

Let’s see if we can reach some kind of accord here that will satisfy your insistence for one catch all word.

There are neighbors

Some neighbors receive natural affections
Some neighbors receive human affections
Some neighbors receive Christian affections
Some neighbors receive opposition affections

So, we have all these different people wherein we have different affections but they are all neighbors.

Admission – I got this idea from the Puritan Thomas Wilson on the subject

JS writes,

When a man is in front of me, I am not permitted to ask first about his ethnicity before determining whether I owe him love. Love is not mere sentiment. It is obligation. It is responsibility. And that responsibility is grounded in the image of God, not in tribal proximity.

BLMc writes,

When I have a man in front of me and my Son next to me and both of them need a dollar who am I to show neighborliness to first and foremost Joe? Well, of course, the one in tribal proximity to me.

Silly boy.

JS writes,

So again, the question remains:

Do you agree with Calvin that every man is our neighbor?

Bret responds,

So, again the question remains, do you agree with Thomas Wilson above about the different type of affections neighbors are to receive?

JS (thinking he has me pinned … LOL)

Until you answer that directly, all of your appeals to degrees of love and historical examples are beside the point.

BLMC responds,

I have answered it directly. Until you can understand the nuances of the conversation your DEMANDS serve to embarrass you.

JS writes,

That is the issue.

Bret

Rev. Spurgeon, what you’ve just said is one of the most insanely idiotic things I have ever heard. At no point in your rambling, incoherent response were you even close to anything that could be considered a rational thought. Everyone in this room is now dumber for having listened to it. I award you no points, and may God have mercy on your soul.