(November 21, 2013 at 1:58 pm)Kitanetos Wrote:(November 21, 2013 at 1:46 pm)Drich Wrote: In short We are commanded to Agape' God.
Despite your attempt at semantics, the reciprocation of true love cannot be directed from a fictional character toward you, except in your self-deluded mind. In order to further remain in the comforts that the self delusion provides, you have concocted the false ideal of being loved by a higher being in a cruel world that you believe lacks the love you seek.
Real love does exist, but no fictional character can provide it. Love may be irrational at times, but it is illogical to attribute love to the irrational belief in a fictional deity. One clearly does exist by the merit of universal human experience while the other does not by the fact that not everyone has a personal experience with it.
This is the part where I get to call you stupid or obstinate for not reading the defination of agape' even after telling you reading was manditory to continue this conversation. because We are not just talking semantics. We are also talking about translation and context as the orginal word denotes a specific aspect of Love that is lost in translation. To understand this aspect you must look beyond what this word means in your language and look to define it as the text was orginally written.
If you weren't being stupid or obstinate you would have noted Agape' is not a reciproical form of Love. Maybe this time if you choose to respond READ THE DEFINATION OF AGAPE!
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Greek_words_for_love
