Can you love on command?

Matthew 22:36-40 (KJV)
36 Master, which is the great commandment in the law?
37 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.
38 This is the first and great commandment.
39 And the second is like unto it, Thou shalt love thy neighbour as thyself.
40 On these two commandments hang all the law and the prophets.

----------------------------------------------

Jesus should know, --- if intelligent at all, that an emotions like love cannot be commanded or demanded from people.

Whatever force was driving Jesus to put that command into our reality, be that force or God real or myth, could not have been a very intelligent force.

You recognize those you love and who return the emotion by works and deeds.

Can one be effectively ordered to love knowing that true love, as with true faith, must have deeds, works and reciprocity?

Imagine you never doing anything for those you love. They would and could not know you love them. Imagine those who profess loving you without them ever showing it by actions. You could never know that they love you.

Can you love on command a God that is not here and unable to share that love?

Can you love your neighbor without doing something for him?

Is love a one way thing or must it be returned to be real love?

Are the so called great commandments unworkable rhetoric?

You should know that I think we are basically all living those commandments in a partial and blind way, as we are collectively helping our poorer neighbors. It is the intellectual efficacy or veracity of those commands that I question.

Regards
DL

Love in the Gospel can also be read as showing charity, or to welcome (the 'agape' love that in the passage quoted would be a welcoming love). Love in Christianity is usually seen as a movement of the will, towards an action, and not an emotion.

So christians have to love gay people if they live next to them? Yippee.

Can you love on command?

sometimes I need a little blue pill and a glass of water first.

I've never really read that passage as mandating an emotion so much as a practice. It might be unworkable rhetoric for many of us, but I suspect that people who devote themselves to consistent acts of loving-kindness to others (and not just "loved ones") eventually develop a strong disposition to feel compassionate and loving toward most people most of the time. Like Michael said: a movement of the will, not an emotion -- though I think the practice plants and reinforces the emotion over time.

...thereby proving that atheists can also cherry pick when it suits their agenda.

(August 29, 2014 at 11:58 am)Greatest I am Wrote: an emotion like love cannot be commanded or demanded from people.

The love that God commands isn't an emotion. It is an act of the will in which you choose to do what is good for that person regardless of how you feel about him. Acting in love toward a person sometimes has an effect on how you feel about him. If you regularly do good for someone you dislike you might begin to like him.

(August 29, 2014 at 12:03 pm)Diablo Wrote: So christians have to love gay people if they live next to them? Yippee.

Christians should love gay people regardless of whether they live next to them or not. Love doesn't necessarily mean approving of what they do. If someone is engaging in activity that is sinful love requires warning them of the consequences of their actions. These sites might help you understand how Christians should express their love for gays.

http://www.strengthinweakness.org/

http://truefreedomtrust.co.uk/start_here

http://www.christopheryuan.com/mobile/index.html

(August 29, 2014 at 12:43 pm)ChadWooters Wrote: ...thereby proving that atheists can also cherry pick when it suits their agenda.

What agenda? The part where I read Jesus' alleged words in such a way that he seems more consequential than I usually find him? This is how I have read that passage for years. But alright, have it your way. Jesus is ordering an emotion, thereby proving that (1) he had little or no sense concerning the way we form loving attachments, and (2) Christian "sin" is built to a significant degree on imaginary thought crimes. Is that better, Chad?

(August 29, 2014 at 12:03 pm)Michael Wrote: Love in the Gospel can also be read as showing charity, or to welcome (especially the agape love that is in the passage quoted).

Or to obey/treat. If the wisest thing a man can do is obey god's word, then you can replace the word "love" in Matthew 22:37 with "obey" and I don't think that any Christian would find issue with it. For verse 39 I think you can insert the word "treat" and I think it also works.

(August 29, 2014 at 12:03 pm)Michael Wrote: Love in the Gospel can also be read as showing charity, or to welcome (the 'agape' love that in the passage quoted would be a welcoming love). Love in Christianity is usually seen as a movement of the will, towards an action, and not an emotion.

Works and deeds is usually used for actions but you may be right.

Is reciprocity a part of love or can it be just one way?

Can anyone love God if he is not about to return that love by accepting and returning works and deeds?

Regards
DL