Can God love?

[The Grand Nudger]

Emjays a bit of a pushover, lol.  The only thing he profoundly misunderstood is what -you- are referring to with eros.  He actually got it right from his source material.

Er... awkward But maybe I just wanted to have a discussion rather an argument, because I'm actually interested in the subject and it's new to me... and there's no point if we're talking about different things.

Anyway, what did I get right? I don't hear that very often

You;re not going to get a "conversation" out of Drich, lol. Heres here to fish for souls by telling you you;re wrong about everything.

Eros.  It actually is the desire of value and the seeking out of value or transcendent beauty..at least in it;s classical conception. In point of fact..eros -is- love.  The other categories, like philia...that was friendship.  Agape...good will and benevolence.  When Drich thinks eros he thinks titties....but thats not actually what it was envisioned as, even if it included that as the very lowest form of eros. Of the body driving the eros car rather than the soul doing so.

---

---

No Drich, I;ve never said that lol.  I;ve never worshipped or believed in any gods....nor am I waiting for any god to show up.

I merely note that your personal jesus is an asshole while the majority of others personal jesus is not.

that's a lie earlier this week you were asking my to "go get papa."

You can;t possibly be so dull as to imagine that I thought you would..or were even capable of doing so..can you...?

---

Continuing along.  If a god has love, then it seeks, it desires, it pursues that beauty and value it sees but does not possess.  A god may not have a body, so it may not seek or desire or find value in my peener...lustful bodily eros, butithe must in some way be incomplete and unwhole in the absence of my possession as a valuable and beautiful thing.

A god asserted to be complete and whole in every way, that desires for nothing because it has everything.....cannot possibly love, cannot express eros..because love is found in the seeking. It may be benevolent, (agape). It may be friendly (philia)..it may even be empathetic (storge)..but it does not love....eros.

More broadly, the retrograde christians god possesses none of these things by reference to it;s purported actions and position...all retrograde christians assertions to the contrary...but is that really surprising? They didn;t come up with any of this, it was yet another borrowed ladder grafted onto their confused mythology as a bid to purchase the credibility that came with classical pagan intellectual traditions.

---

John 13:34 - “A new command I give you: Love one another as I have loved you.”

The Bible speaks a lot about God’s love, from a Christian view.

That one would be a rather empty command if one deferred to a retrograde view of how god "loves" us. 

Personally, I like the buddy jesus who does actually love, and in the context of that and ignoring pretty much every other bit of scripture that would be a great command..perhaps the only command required.

"We should like..love each other and stuff..man" Yeah...yeah! That dirty hippys right! We should seek each other out and see the value and transcendent beauty of man. We should want that, and want to possess it ourselves. We should want to preserve it, promote it, grow it, see it increase. This, imo, was the failure of the arc that christendom took for so long..because it had so much potential to be the good news so many believe it to be.