Can God love?

[Drich]

Today, All God is asking that 2/3's to make the commitment to him by standing against the sin we are slaves to. he know we can not live sin free lives, but at the same time we can not love or embrace our sin either we must live in opposition to it. And let Jesus' atonement carry us the rest of the way.

...the greatest "sin" imaginable.

Attempting to pay for a moral debt in blood money only incurs an even greater debt.  Your god may be incapable of love..so I can understand why it wouldn;t know that.  What;s your excuse, lol?

And if it is not a 'moral debt?' Morality is man's standard. morality is intermixed with a level of sin man is willing to accept. that is why paying a moral debt with blood always requires more blood. there is no floor with morality, it is an ever downward spiraling scale.

God righteousness is absolute and well defined. Sin is also absolute and well defined.

so is the cost/requirements for the atonement of sin. After Christ's sacrifice there isn't any more cost to us. God simply wants you to acknowelege what has been done for you and pass that grace on when people sin against you.

If you feel there is a secondary cost then please explain this further need for blood you pretend is on the table.

[The Grand Nudger]

I;m uninterested in "sin" that lacks any moral component, even less so in "righteousness" by fiat. If I wouldn;t pay a moral debt in the blood of another, why would a pay a non debt for a non thing with the blood of another? That;s even worse. All irony always lost on you...you;re still bitching about the stronger moral fiber of others while expounding upon a transactionary theory of complete and utter depravity.

Pass.

[Drich]

7 mLove bears all things, believes all things, hopes all things, eendures all things.

I'm pretty sure that I know the meaning of the word 'all' even if you and Paul, apparently, do not.

All with in Agape. God can not extend Agape' to those who refuse it. Let say something crazy like God has already forgiven you all of all your sins and opened heaven to you. Yet you still can not go. The problem is not with God. it is with you and your elected separation from God. At this point the only way you enter heaven is against your own will. God's love has extended you an invitation all you must to is formally accept it.

So then how is it God's fault or how has God failed you? For God so loved the world He gave his only Son that who so ever believes shall not perish...
The love/Agape ALL things has been full filled on His end. The wedge between you and God is not with Him. There are no barriers between you to beside the ones you yourself have put up. That is the only thing between any of you and God.

[The Grand Nudger]

-and yet graveyards are full of christians.  What a fuckup.

[Drich]

I;d caution again against accepting drichs hateful god as representative of modern christianity.  He has, on many occasions, bitched about all the ways his god is different from theirs.  The only thing his god represents is his own inadequacy, and the basket of insecurities that go with that.

My God is different in that nothing stands between you and eternal life except the baggage you put in your own way. Everyone else demands you swear allegiance to a church or religion.. My God/God of the bible works with you directly, everyone else requires you to go through a priest or elder of some kind. MY god/God of the bible is exceptionally easy to find just got to be willing to deal with wind and rain on occasion while other life their whole lives and get nothing. What's more My God promises direct one on one contact not through me or anyone else but it will be you and him alone. as the bible say you do not need a teacher as the same holy Spirit who wrote the bible will then find a home in you. Sound to me like he's a tyrant. Granted He will not be manipulated by the hippy bs church's are plagued with, nor will he be bound by foolish paradox as the god of man's doctrine is bound so then that means he does not acknoweledge or pay respects to people who use that BS to try and impact or influence the plan or direction of the God of the bible. which in turn means his followers do not have to bend the knee at the P/C garbage so many of you default to in order to try and put the 'reigns on morality' onto God. Remembermorality is man's standard of living God is about righteousness and notthe corruption that in inhearent with man's morality.

This isn;t to say that you;re going to get a more satisfying answer from a mainstream christian if one showed up to share, but consider the nature of the question you;ve asked.  You;re looking for dry consistency in a composite mythology.

why is that? because we are all different and on different levels of understanding. there is no demand that we reach a bar of understanding only that we do our best with the gifts and limitations we have been given. So you may ask X to someone new in the faith and he may say 123. then ask the sam "X" to some one a few years in and you may get 345 or 678 then you may ask someone who has the insight of the Holy Spirit and you get 10 11 and 12 for an answer. So which one is right?

All and none. all are right given their understand none are right if others do not understand it. it about honoring what you have been given to understand. there are no hard lines in Christianity any more. since Christ came it has been about removing the solid rules and put in place a stanard of doing your best.

[SteveII]

This whole idea that God would love me 'if', is, I think, rather beside the point.  If God chooses not to let me near because of some supposed flaw, or whether he cannot, is, I think an irrelevant distinction.  Love, in order to be real, has to actually involve, you know, "loving" the other.  If God neither does actually let me near, regardless of whether he simply won't, or because he can't, then God's love for me is never actualized.  Love that is never tested isn't really love, it's just the idea of love.  We have no idea whether God would or would not embrace me in spite of my flaws because he never actually does.  So this idea that God has agape for me is hollow, empty, and meaningless.  It is like the teenager's "undying love" for her boyfriend that turns out not to be so undying after all.  God's love cuts and runs at the first sign of trouble.  How Christians consider that agape, or anything at all, is beyond me.  That's not love, it's just a romantic notion.  It's the idea that God would love you if he could, but he can't, so he shan't.  It's nothing real, it's just empty words.

God has certainly 'actualized' his love for everyone even prior to any one person's salvation experience:

1. John 3:16, For God so loved the world...he died to atone for anyone's sin. Romans 5:6-8, God proved his love for us in that while we were yet sinners, Christ died for us.
2. God continually preserves this message of hope and constantly orchestrates events so that people hear it. Mark 4:3-20 (the parable of the sower/seeds)
3. When a person's heart is receptive to this hope, he is waiting there to respond. I John 1:8-9


So, your whole point above is wrong: God has already shown his love for us. There is no "God would love you if he could, but he can't, so he shan't."

My references are not exhaustive, rather are just one of many places in the NT where you get the same principles.

[The Grand Nudger]

My God is different in that nothing stands between you and eternal life except the baggage you put in your own way. 

My moral character stands in the way.  You don;t have one..so it;s easy to see why you imagine it would be okay to accept the murder of another for your profligate "sins"...that you see no cost in this.  

since Christ came it has been about removing the solid rules and put in place a stanard of doing your best.

If this is your best...your best is insufficient. I don;t subscribe to the participation medal theory of human decency. Unlike you or your god....I have standards.

[Drich]

I can move in and out of your society with easy further more I can also move in and out of far eastern societies with little difficulty as well, why? because I master pop cultures when I was 10.

You haven't mastered it, Drich.  You're playing Don Quixote, tilting at the windmill of "I understand this world better than you ever will."  You're an angry little pissant who hasn't even figured out the link between rhetorical persuasion and basic courtesy.

based on what? what you read here?
what if I went idk just a little deeper than that?

What if growing up in a two cultured house hold gave me perspective on both? Could it not then stand to reason I learn to play two seperate cultural roles at a very young age?

---

I mean, this thread has talked about god's purported unconditional love - agape - yet the best analogy is not letting a loved one into the house because of their muddy shoes?  Or because of their addiction (which is an illness)?

Man, if I loved someone, I wouldn't throw them out because of muddy shoes, even if it happened every day.  What I'd do instead would be to make them clean up the mess.  You know, actual, personal atonement, not done through a proxy.  Similarly, I'd do what I could to help a loved one in the grip of addiction seek help.  Maybe I'd have to distance myself from them at some point, but I'd damn well make an honest effort to help them before it got to that point.

Well try this is muddy shoes is too deep.

Agape means all sin for everyone has been forgiven.

This means the only thing keeping us from entering heaven is our own want or will to be with God.

Meaning the gates are open to anyone willing to love/serve God. which ultimatly means having enough respect for God to honor and accept what Christ has done on our behalf.

No other morality point matter.

That means the only reason your don't go to heaven is because you do not want to go. or put it another way the only way you go in under these conditions is if God drags you into heaven kicking and screaming.

So where is the hate? where does agape fall short here?

God has open the gate to all who would enter in all that is required is an acknowledgment to Christ's sacrifice. at the same time he does not drag anyone kicking and screaming into heaven.

Again I dont see the hate or absence of love. He has eliminated all requirments concerning moral law and left it up to personal choice and stands by your choice.

Problem is most of you want to order what is not on the menu.

Agape allows you to eat anything the restraunt has to offer, but you want what it does not. a heaven with out God. Gapae entitles you to have all that God offers bt nothing more. which is why most of you elect to not enter heaven

[Neo-Scholastic]

the only reason your don't go to heaven is because you do not want to go...

That's pretty much the bottom line. For some, not all, some, they just don't want God to exist because that would mean there is a moral authority higher than themselves to which they would be accountable.

---

Agape allows you to eat anything the restraunt has to offer, but you want what it does not. a heaven with out God. Gapae entitles you to have all that God offers bt nothing more. which is why most of you elect to not enter heaven

That's a great way to put it. They want a heaven without God. I would add that they want a heaven without God so they can claim to be god.

[Astreja]

You haven't mastered it, Drich.  You're playing Don Quixote, tilting at the windmill of "I understand this world better than you ever will."  You're an angry little pissant who hasn't even figured out the link between rhetorical persuasion and basic courtesy.

based on what? what you read here?
what if I went idk just a little deeper than that?

All we can go on is what you post.  If you want to be seen as something better, then you have to write accordingly.  Give it a try.