We often add sorrow to our blessings, but we should not because: “The blessing of the Lord makes rich, and He adds no sorrow to it.” Proverbs 10:22
These “blessings” are upon the head of the righteous as spoken in Proverbs 10:6. They are augmented with no “pangs” of grief, no cuttings or wounds. Yes, these “adorings” of God, these deep soul thanksgivings, these praise evokings, are without painful regrets, feelings of deceit, cautions of being cheated, or suspicions of fraud. There is no distortion, violation of rights, or irreverent treatment; as “violence” is on the mouth of those who receive unjust gain.
Their mouths are well concealed as their intents are also — but the mouth of the righteous is a well of life, and his lips feed many. Proverbs 10:11 and 21
“The tongue of the righteous is as choice silver.” Proverbs 10:20
In John’s gospel we find Jesus asking Peter 3 separate questions.
” …Simon, son of Jonas, do you love me more than these?” Why more than the others? In Luke 7:47 Jesus teaches, “Wherefore I say unto thee, Her sins, which are many, are forgiven; for she loved much: but to whom little is forgiven, the same loveth little.”
Peter didn’t realize it yet, but he had been forgiven a great amount (perhaps more than the others), — after all, he had denied his friend and Savior a few days ago, three times.
- Second question, “Simon, son of Jonas, love thou me?” Peter replied as he had done for the first quiery, “Yea, Lord; you know that I love thee.”
Peter’s reply of love showed his emotions, but, perhaps he spoke with the baggage of many regrets, much guilt, a sense of the uncertainty of his own feelings and aims. His hypocrisy had been exposed before all.
- Then Jesus asked, ” Simon, son of Jonas, love thou me?” Jesus had asked for the constant, soul steadying, kind of “agape” love but now condescends to Peter’s responses. He asks if Peter loved Him with the more “soulish” kind of “phileo” love. Peter was grieved at the third question. Why? John 21:15-17
I think Peter hated that his love was of an inferior kind. He was shamed and degraded since he had thought of himself as the “never betraying” disciple. It was an ego blow, a pride neutralizer.
Each time Jesus came back with the reply, “feed my lambs” or “feed my sheep.”
Thankfully, Jesus seemed satisfied with either kind of love. O yes, Jesus would still commission Peter even in his broken state.
The moral of the story goes this way:
God treats us as unconditionally as He treats His own Son. After some time, with many forgiveness’s and many risings again, we may more easily discard our guilt feelings, regretful naggings, and “conditional” responses. We may enter into the amazing joy of never ending love, and care, and realize that our Father will always cover our “multitude” of sins in order that we may feed His sheep and lambs. After all, they need this kind of “tender loving care.”
In closing, Charles Spurgeon remarks, “It is the sole prerogative of God to heal spiritual disease,”” As for spiritual sicknesses, these remain with the Great Physician alone.”
“Come then with the blind eye of darkened understanding, come with the limping foot of wasted energy, come with the maimed hand of weak faith, the fever of an angry temper, or the ague of shivering despondency, come just as thou art…” Spurgeon
Friends, in the healing is the blessing, it makes us rich, and He adds no sorrow with it . In His presence is fulness of joy. Love ya