Can God love?

[Chad32]

If we're to expect that a god must be love in order to count a a god, and the abrahamic god is one of the most bloodthirsty and violent beings ever written about, then maybe we can safely say that he just isn't a god, and isn't worth worshiping because Yahweh/Jehova isn't loving. Not in any sense that we understand as healthy, and if he's beyond our understanding, then we can't be certain of any claim about him.

[Drich]

Nope. The character displays all the signs of a narcissistic abusive partner who uses "love" as just another form of manipulation.

poor single minded rob.. can't quite wrap his mind around the idea that the concept of love in other cultures differs from his own. He can't quite grasp that the term in other cultures/other times is not the all inclusive word that he demands it to be when ever he uses the word. maybe one day he will learn to look beyond himself to see how others use the word and maybe apply that lesson to how idk maybe the word was used in the koine greek to only describe one aspect of the word he uses to describes all aspects of the word love.

[The Grand Nudger]

That;s a really silly way to agree with the atheists, Drich.

---

To be blunt, every christian response in this thread has been a deplorable failure of your shared christology..each in turn tripping over yourselves and each other to declare god incapable of love as fully as a human being..forgetting that christ was..himself, fully human. Personally, I think that's emblematic of the problem creeping in with certain cults of christerism...entirely losing their human angle.

[Drich]

Funnily enough I'm reading a very interesting book at the moment that covers this subject, comparing, contrasting, and logically analysing three concepts of love; Plato's eros, Christian agape, and Aristotle's philia.

Where in a nutshell eros is deemed man's route to God, and agape, God's route to man. Eros is acquisitive love based on seeking value... 'the good' (whatever that may be for a person). The logic goes... as I presently understand it... you cannot want what you already have except inasmuch as to keep it into the future, therefore you want the good and you want to keep it forever... ie you want eternal good... and therefore immortality. So where to Plato the Gods are both immortal and want for nothing, they cannot themselves love but only be the objects of man's love, hence man's route to God.

And where, in comparison, agape is God's route to man, conceptualised as a value-creating rather than value-seeking type of love.

So far in my reading, Plato's concept of eros makes a lot of sense to me. I mean I'm not seeking metaphysical immortality but I understand and agree with the psychological principles behind what he's saying... that you seek value and seek to maintain it... which is essentially seeking immortality if only in the moment. It's just that nonexistence poses no threat to that, in the sense that it is the absence of seeking full stop. In other words I understand seeking that sort of 'eternal good' in life, but ceasing to exist poses no threat to that.

Anyway, as it stands agape makes less sense to me, but I'm not even half way through the book yet. So it remains to be seen, how coherent that will be as a concept to me.

Rob maybe read this slowly a few more times...

Emjay you've hit the nail on the head.

Think of Agape' to start with as the 'respect' one has for very valued employee.. then image how that relationship changes over time and the employee becomes like a son, and respect and love develops over time sometimes even strong than a father son mother daughter relationship could ever, because these two being elect to serve and honor one another. one looking out for the other. sadly not every paternal relationship works out this way. now imagine a life time of serving the same man/family or rather look at how joseph (coat of many colors ) served pharaoh by interpreting his dreams and helped egypt through feast times and famine to the point egypt became the most wealthy buying out other countries riches for the grain joseph had them store up. then at the end of all that look at how Joseph was rewarded for his service. he was placed in charge of all of egypt. the only one who had say over joseph was pharaoh himself. but it was joseph who was sat on the throne and ruled the nation of egypt.

The respect given to joseph by pharaoh was a form of agape love. in how agape is manifest pharaoh could literally not give joseph any more and still be pharaoh. God offers the same thing based on our understanding and our talents and abilities. God's agape is to form a life tailor made for you and to suit your strengths and challenge your weaknesses to bring you up to a standard so that when you pass on you can continue to serve in the most satisfying and perfect way.

I believe all other forms of 'love' are secondary or substitutes for agape. because once you experience true agape you will know that is what we were orginally designed for. that agape is what is missing in all of our lives. Pure agape can only be sourced by God. in this life we get a vibe or strong feeling of love from God from time to time, but never get to feel the all encomassing submersion.. the closest is baptism in a day to day believer's life. (which don't get me wrong is extremely strong sense of love) it's just God has so much more to give.

[Mystic]

God has compassion for all things, in that sense he loves all. In the sense of praising and liking, that is not to all. And in the sense of really intimately loving, that is for those who believe and follow his guidance.

[Drich]

It makes me worry about the kind of "love" people have received, and what kind they might pass on, if they think the character in the bible is loving.

still do not understand the term as anything different than what you've always known.

---

"God is love" is a sick joke. "Do unto others as you would have others do unto you", is little more than propaganda to cover up God's true nature. It's a bit rich, don't you think, coming from the mouth of someone--Jesus--who would send most (if not all) of human beings that ever lived to hell? The god of the Bible is a dangerous deity and deserves to die. That is to say, belief in the biblical god is dangerous to one's mental and moral health and deserves to fade from memory.

Because you like rob value do not understand the word agape.

Agape' you lord god with all of your being or be separated from Him and be consumed by the fire of Hell so you and people like you can not bring sin and disruption to God's people or any other part of His creation.

What you 'good people' don't get is if you are too proud to simply seek atonement you are actively working for sin, as such there is no difference between you and an isis fighter seeking to destroy what does not align itself with their religious views. So God separated those who want to serve and love Him from those who don't.

---

god is love is another mental crutch. Just like all of the other "god is .........".

And theoretical science isn't? 

Here get this: 100 trillion years ago there was nothing except in the center of what would be a the known universe. and in that center was a basket ball... a basket ball solid of course because in that basket ball contained all matter all planets all oceans all stars everything! then it exploded the uncaused cause for no reason despite what would be an unfathomable amount of gravity caused an outward explosion!!

And all the small minds said amen, tell me more because that is soooo much more plausible than any part of creation.

---

If we're to expect that a god must be love in order to count a a god, and the abrahamic god is one of the most bloodthirsty and violent beings ever written about, then maybe we can safely say that he just isn't a god, and isn't worth worshiping because Yahweh/Jehova isn't loving. Not in any sense that we understand as healthy, and if he's beyond our understanding, then we can't be certain of any claim about him.

look beyond your use of the word love. when you do you will see that 'love' in the bible was never intended to be used as you use the word. "love" in the biblical sense also describes the use of punishment, and protection from those who would do you harm. Bet you mordern day douche bags can not fathom a love that would demand a switch being used. Therfore your idea of 'love' has nothing to do with how the bible uses the term. so change your word or use the biblical term so you do not falsely compare the two terms.

---

That;s a really silly way to agree with the atheists, Drich.

---

To be blunt, every christian response in this thread has been a deplorable failure of your shared christology..each in turn tripping over yourselves and each other to declare god incapable of love as fully as a human being..forgetting that christ was..himself, fully human.  Personally, I think that's emblematic of the problem creeping in with certain cults of christerism...entirely losing their human angle.

that's a silly way to say you don't understand what is being discussed Kimie-cal.

[Minimalist]

Agape' you lord god with all of your being or be separated from Him and be consumed by the fire of Hell so you and people like you can not bring sin and disruption to God's people or any other part of His creation.

Kind of 1984-ish, dripshit.  You can keep such a fucked up god all to yourself.  Suck his cock for eternity if you like.

[Chad32]

I'm not sure why we should care about outdated definitions of love. We've changed as a society to the point where if it doesn't fit the way we see love, then why should we want it?

[The Grand Nudger]

I doubt that love has changed much in the past 50k years, lol. The deeply humanist message of the new testament, otoh, has changed drastically in the last 60.

[Fake Messiah]

What you 'good people' don't get is if you are too proud to simply seek atonement you are actively working for sin, as such there is no difference between you and an isis fighter seeking to destroy what does not align itself with their religious views.

Really ISIS? There is difference between me and ISIS. I don't believe in Allah or any god and also don't kill people and bomb cities. The only thing I do is showing you that your religion is wrong by writing on the internet, but you're too big of a snowflake to handle it.