what is loyalty?

[juvenissun]

How could god love someone and keep a promise without being loyal?

That is profound.
God is not suppose to love, protect His people with the sacrifice of His own life.
Without having that nature, it is not loyalty. So, except the Christian God, no other gods is loyal to his people. It only works the other way around.

 

[Blessedj01]

That is profound.
God is not suppose to love, protect His people with the sacrifice of His own life.
Without having that nature, it is not loyalty. So, except the Christian God, no other gods is loyal to his people. It only works the other way around.

Are you saying God did or didn't sacrifice His own life?

I'm just a bit confused.

 

[sarxweh]

That is profound.
God is not suppose to love, protect His people with the sacrifice of His own life.
Without having that nature, it is not loyalty. So, except the Christian God, no other gods is loyal to his people. It only works the other way around.

The concept of loyalty comes from the one who defined it perfectly.

Yes, it is profound that god would express loyalty in leu of our sin and rebellion.

What other religion holds so little respect for the moral reputation of its founders?

Man imagining 'god's power' would never invent the divine loyalty as is seen in the biblical God, just as man imagining 'god's loyalty' as an innate quality of the human spirit wouldn't invent god at all.

 

[juvenissun]

Are you saying God did or didn't sacrifice His own life?

I'm just a bit confused.

The Christian God did. Other gods will not do the same.

 

[juvenissun]

The concept of loyalty comes from the one who defined it perfectly.

Yes, it is profound that god would express loyalty in leu of our sin and rebellion.

What other religion holds so little respect for the moral reputation of its founders?

Man imagining 'god's power' would never invent the divine loyalty as is seen in the biblical God, just as man imagining 'god's loyalty' as an innate quality of the human spirit wouldn't invent god at all.

However, I still think it is not right to use loyalty to describe the Christian God.

If Lord Jesus can not resurrect after His death, then the religion failed. The Lord Jesus resurrected, which means God has the power to overcome death. So His sacrifice is different from the sacrifice of human (can not resurrect by himself). If we use loyalty to describe human, then it is improper to use it to describe God.

Loyalty is a commitment made from the inferior to the superior, but not the other way around.

--------

This is the only thread I ever experienced, which I only give replies, but not asking a single question.

Thank you very much for your nice questions.

 

[Blessedj01]

Loyalty is a commitment made from the inferior to the superior, but not the other way around.

It doesn't have to be.

The Lord Jesus resurrected, which means God has the power to overcome death. So His sacrifice is different from the sacrifice of human (can not resurrect by himself).

Are you comparing our sacrifice to God's?

 

[sarxweh]

However, I still think it is not right to use loyalty to describe the Christian God.

If our understanding of loyalty comes only from human examples of it, then I can see what you mean I think.

If Lord Jesus can not resurrect after His death, then the religion failed. The Lord Jesus resurrected, which means God has the power to overcome death. So His sacrifice is different from the sacrifice of human (can not resurrect by himself).

If we use loyalty to describe human, then it is improper to use it to describe God.

I could use loyalty to describe gods longsuffering kindness because of his covenant faithfulness, and not imply that he is limited to human expressions of loyalty. I completely agree that it is always important that we get our notion of essence and definition from the creator and not the creature. Its because loyalty is a divine characteristic, that mankind gets to have loyalty as an option. Think of marital faithfulness - its based on the concept of Christ's love for the church. The shadow loyalties of God's "substance loyalty" is all over the place for us to see.

Loyalty is a commitment made from the inferior to the superior, but not the other way around.

I'm interested in this aspect of loyalty. Are you saying loyalty is always and only the lesser serving the greater? That's an interesting take on it.

I am loyal to my wife and she to me, and to be sure that is an act of service, but it is also an act of equality isn't it?
--------

This is the only thread I ever experienced, which I only give replies, but not asking a single question.

Thank you very much for your nice questions.

Thank you! God bless you! That's very encouraging

 

[juvenissun]

If our understanding of loyalty comes only from human examples of it, then I can see what you mean I think.



I could use loyalty to describe gods longsuffering kindness because of his covenant faithfulness, and not imply that he is limited to human expressions of loyalty. I completely agree that it is always important that we get our notion of essence and definition from the creator and not the creature. Its because loyalty is a divine characteristic, that mankind gets to have loyalty as an option. Think of marital faithfulness - its based on the concept of Christ's love for the church. The shadow loyalties of God's "substance loyalty" is all over the place for us to see.



I'm interested in this aspect of loyalty. Are you saying loyalty is always and only the lesser serving the greater? That's an interesting take on it.

I am loyal to my wife and she to me, and to be sure that is an act of service, but it is also an act of equality isn't it?

Lord Jesus is loyal to God, not to human. We can see that when He receives the tests from satan.

Yeah, husband/wife relation should could be taken as an exception to my concept of loyalty. God made it so. However, this kind of loyalty is fragile. If one spouse became unfaithful, then the loyalty between them could disappear. We use loyalty to describe the commitment to our parents, but not to our children.

If a general is loyal to a king, the loyalty remains even the king wrongly put him into jail.

 

[Blessedj01]

Lord Jesus is loyal to God, not to human. We can see that when He receives the tests from satan.

But loyalty isn't restricted in that sense. Also, the tests came from satan, not humans.

Yeah, husband/wife relation should could be taken as an exception to my concept of loyalty. God made it so. However, this kind of loyalty is fragile. If one spouse became unfaithful, then the loyalty between them could disappear. We use loyalty to describe the commitment to our parents, but not to our children.

I don't know, I think many parents are loyal to their children. We seem to be stuck on semantics.

If a general is loyal to a king, the loyalty remains even the king wrongly put him into jail.

Not necessarily. That's why God's loyalty is different - his loyalty remains no matter how badly we treat Him.

 

[PsychoSarah]

The Christian God did. Other gods will not do the same.

Norse gods are far more self-sacrificing for humanity than the Christian god. Not only do some of them die, but when they do it is permanent. Even better, they know inevitably that they will fail to protect humanity and all of existence and will perish into nonexistence, and yet they still fight to delay that for as long as possible. Tyr, as an example, had his hand bitten off as a means by which to trap a terrible beast that was hurting people and seemed unstoppable. Thor's destiny is to die from the poison of a huge serpent as he kills it. Yes, some of them get the joy of knowing how they will inevitably die in the service to humanity, and yet despite that they still fight.

 

[Blessedj01]

Norse gods are far more self-sacrificing for humanity than the Christian god. Not only do some of them die, but when they do it is permanent. Even better, they know inevitably that they will fail to protect humanity and all of existence and will perish into nonexistence, and yet they still fight to delay that for as long as possible. Tyr, as an example, had his hand bitten off as a means by which to trap a terrible beast that was hurting people and seemed unstoppable. Thor's destiny is to die from the poison of a huge serpent as he kills it. Yes, some of them get the joy of knowing how they will inevitably die in the service to humanity, and yet despite that they still fight.

Christ was perfect, without sin, the author of Creation. He died for his own creation, in a sacrifice of infinite value. He rose again BECAUSE he was doing it for us - not because he was trying to make a cynical ploy for our sympathy. Better yet, God was successful in His mission. He defeated death and made the way for us to live eternally without sin. Even better yet, God actually did what He did. The Norse 'gods' are nothing more than myths and demons masquerading as real deities.

...and you'd prefer History Channel's Vikings over all that? Sorry to hear that.

 

[PsychoSarah]

Christ was perfect, without sin, the author of Creation. He died for his own creation, in a sacrifice of infinite value. He rose again BECAUSE he was doing it for us - not because he was trying to make a cynical ploy for our sympathy. Better yet, God was successful in His mission. He defeated death and made the way for us to live eternally without sin.

...and you'd prefer History Channel's Vikings over all that? Sorry to hear that.

I don't prefer those gods, I just view a permanent loss as being more of a sacrifice than a temporary one. Odin pulled out his own eye. With his bare hands. Even Jesus didn't physically torture himself. You also don't seem to understand, but Norse gods actually do not punish people for not worshipping them. They protect everyone their limited power allows them to. The afterlife for that religion depends on what you did in life as well as how you died. Those who die in battle join the gods in the fight to protect all of existence, and those who die peacefully never helping anyone go to Hel, which is more or less a dark place rather than a place of inherent suffering.

I view this as overall more selfiess than a deity which demands worship or face the consequences.

 

[Blessedj01]

I don't prefer those gods, I just view a permanent loss as being more of a sacrifice than a temporary one.

It was a permanent loss. Show me where Christ came back, lived on from the age of 33, got married, had some kids, kicked back, retired and lived in a nice house by a lake. Jesus ascended to Heaven again, but His story on earth as a man came to an end.

Not only that, but Christ suffered the permanent loss of his dignity, innocence and freedom from feeling the effects of sin. While Christ's dignity was later redeemed and he was always free of guilt, He never gets to go back to not having suffered an infinite torment for all of our sins - and he still has people like you (and me, to a degree) denigrating Him for it. It's like he was never truly allowed to get off that cross. His humiliation was utter and complete.

Odin pulled out his own eye. With his bare hands. Even Jesus didn't physically torture himself.

Big deal, a rapper did that too.

Houston (singer) - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Are Odin and 'Houston' on the same level?

Do you know about how Jesus was treated, how he was tortured?

Do you know that the term "excruciating" was created to describe a new level of pain and suffering that could not be defined in Latin? That the term "excruciating" comes from Christ's crucifixion.

You also don't seem to understand, but Norse gods actually do not punish people for not worshipping them.

Why is this oversimplification so important to you? How many years are you going to come on here and trot that one out? That's not the real reason that God "punishes" us - and further - our 'punishment' is an extension of our intent to be separate from God. Why do you keep on ignoring Christ's redeeming work and falsifying this idea of a malicious God?

They protect everyone their limited power allows them to.

Sounds lovely, my God protects EVERYONE with his UNLIMITED power, if they simply receive the gift of faith.

The afterlife for that religion depends on what you did in life as well as how you died.

Oh good, so not only can you fail in life but you can fail in death too. Sounds comforting.

Those who die in battle join the gods in the fight to protect all of existence, and those who die peacefully never helping anyone go to Hel, which is more or less a dark place rather than a place of inherent suffering.

So, according to you, eternal sin that results in death/murder/rape/theft/treason all kinds of evil - is not worthy of punishment, but failure to "fight" for the 'protection of existence', is? Besides that, isn't Hel a deity? And it seems she's capable of all kinds of unpleasantness.

I view this as overall more selfiess than a deity which demands worship or face the consequences.

One post, same false claim twice. See if you can make it three next time. Maybe the more you post it, the more true it'll become.

 

[PsychoSarah]

Look dude, all I am saying, is that the Christian god could never face a permanent death as per your religion for humanity. The Norse gods do. And Hel is the name of both the deity and the place, which is rather unfortunate. And Jesus was essentially god making a sacrifice to itself because apparently said deity is incapable of simple forgiveness without violence or being paid off in some manner.

No, the Christian god explicitly in the bible only protects believers, and will actualky go out of its way to harm those who aren't believers. That many believers still suffer so horrifically in life despite supposedly being protected by an omnipotent being makes it all the worse. Norse gods don't end all suffering because they aren't capable of it; but the Christian god supposedly is perfectly capable of it and yet chooses not to.

If it makes you feel any better, the Greek/Roman gods and goddesses are the biggest theological jerks in my opinion. I mean all around for deities not considered evil, obviously evil entities are butts.

 

[Blessedj01]

-

 

[sarxweh]

Norse gods are far more self-sacrificing for humanity than the Christian god. Not only do some of them die, but when they do it is permanent. Even better, they know inevitably that they will fail to protect humanity and all of existence and will perish into nonexistence, and yet they still fight to delay that for as long as possible. Tyr, as an example, had his hand bitten off as a means by which to trap a terrible beast that was hurting people and seemed unstoppable. Thor's destiny is to die from the poison of a huge serpent as he kills it. Yes, some of them get the joy of knowing how they will inevitably die in the service to humanity, and yet despite that they still fight.

Great examples. Showing again that the nature of loyalty is an orientation toward a specific ultimatum or reality or goal. Like Segal's statement, the loyalty isn't full agreement with Putin, but it is full affection or belief in "what Putin has done for martial arts" by supporting it.

Point being, loyalty is more like faith in a cause than it is 'bare subserviency' or 'abject selflessness'. Interesting point

 

[Blessedj01]

Look dude, all I am saying, is that the Christian god could never face a permanent death as per your religion for humanity. The Norse gods do. And Hel is the name of both the deity and the place, which is rather unfortunate. And Jesus was essentially god making a sacrifice to itself because apparently said deity is incapable of simple forgiveness without violence or being paid off in some manner.

No, the Christian god explicitly in the bible only protects believers, and will actualky go out of its way to harm those who aren't believers. That many believers still suffer so horrifically in life despite supposedly being protected by an omnipotent being makes it all the worse. Norse gods don't end all suffering because they aren't capable of it; but the Christian god supposedly is perfectly capable of it and yet chooses not to.

If it makes you feel any better, the Greek/Roman gods and goddesses are the biggest theological jerks in my opinion. I mean all around for deities not considered evil, obviously evil entities are butts.

When you have a concept explained to you multiple times but you don't take any information from it to update your perspectives, then you repeat the same lines as if you're saying something new, I can only surmise that you aren't even reading what I'm posting. Have a nice day, Sarah. Good luck with Odin on your side.

 

[Blessedj01]

Great examples. Showing again that the nature of loyalty is an orientation toward a specific ultimatum or reality or goal. Like Segal's statement, the loyalty isn't full agreement with Putin, but it is full affection or belief in "what Putin has done for martial arts" by supporting it.

Point being, loyalty is more like faith in a cause than it is 'bare subserviency' or 'abject selflessness'. Interesting point

Loyalty is more than that. To pledge loyalty to something is to stake your honor on it, to align yourself with it come heaven or high water.

 

[sarxweh]

If it makes you feel any better, the Greek/Roman gods and goddesses are the biggest theological jerks in my opinion. I mean all around for deities not considered evil, obviously evil entities are butts.

I like your style. The Greek and roman gods are also great examples of one way loyalty. The question would be, is it really loyalty when it only goes one way? That sounds more like slavery to me. But maybe that's as good as loyalty gets on a human level where people are the ones inventing/imagining the system.

How would you say the Norse compare in terms of setting the stage for understanding loyalty?

 

[PsychoSarah]

When you have a concept explained to you multiple times but you don't take any information from it to update your perspectives, then you repeat the same lines as if you're saying something new, I can only surmise that you aren't even reading what I'm posting. Have a nice day, Sarah. Good luck with Odin on your side.

I am reading what you are saying, but I am unsure as to how you are reasoning that the sacrifice of the Christian god per the bible exceeds that of the Norse gods in their mythology. I need you to explain your position better, so I reiterate mine hoping you'll add some detail to yours in response.