Defining My Perception of Love

[razzelflabben]

Yes, I understand your point. But the weights are not equal weights... you are talking about living 70-80 years or so and either not making the right decision or making a poor one WHILE IN AN IMPERFECT FALLEN STATE OF EXISTENCE. The punishment for this poor decision while in a fallen state is not 70-80 years of torture (being burned alive with no chance of reprieve is torture) and not 700 or 800 years or 7000 or 8000 years but ETERNITY of being burned alive, with full feeling and understanding? Not equal weights... I just don't see it as you do, sorry.

obviously you don't see it as I do or you would have at least addressed the points I presented that question your understanding of the topic in question...instead of addressing what I said, you insisted on the version you have been taught, claimed to understand what I said while showing you don't and made your judgment call. Now all that is your right, but as I previously stated, I personally believe it is important to understand a concept before I accept or reject it. If you don't, that is your business, but it is a fundamental difference between me and some of the posters here, yourself included based on this post.

 

[Ken Rank]

obviously you don't see it as I do or you would have at least addressed the points I presented that question your understanding of the topic in question...instead of addressing what I said, you insisted on the version you have been taught, claimed to understand what I said while showing you don't and made your judgment call. Now all that is your right, but as I previously stated, I personally believe it is important to understand a concept before I accept or reject it. If you don't, that is your business, but it is a fundamental difference between me and some of the posters here, yourself included based on this post.

What I believe is NOT what I have been taught. I have been taught what you believe, which is we cause our own punishment but ultimately this is a rule God created. I don't see it being equal weights and measurements, sorry. No reason to start making a disagreement personal... that is how you end up with thousands of denominations and sects.

 

[Galatea]

I don't know why no one posted this yet, considering this is a Christian Forum. It really doesn't matter what we think about love, but what God says is love. I realize you are an atheist, but as a Christian, this is what love is: I Corinthians 13, the love chapter of the Bible. It's more about how we are to behave toward others than romantic love, or familial love, so it encompasses all forms.

Verses 1-3 talks about what is not love, the nonexample if you will. Speaking beautiful words without love is nothing, knowledge and faith without love is nothing, bestowing all your goods and even giving your body to martyrdom is nothing. All these things are nothing without love.

Verses 4-8 are what love is: It is long suffering, kind, doesn't envy, isn't proud, is not easily provoked, doesn't think evil, doesn't behave unseemly, does not rejoice in iniquity but rejoices in the truth, bears all things, believes all things, hopes all things, endures all things.

God is love.

 

[razzelflabben]

What I believe is NOT what I have been taught. I have been taught what you believe, which is we cause our own punishment but ultimately this is a rule God created.

yet that isn't what I said at all...so how would you know what I believe if you refuse to listen to what I say?

I don't see it being equal weights and measurements, sorry. No reason to start making a disagreement personal... that is how you end up with thousands of denominations and sects.

yep...all I asked was that any response you posted be directed at what I really did say and not what you think I would say if you could control what I type. You failed at that...so we can be done.

 

[razzelflabben]

I don't know why no one posted this yet, considering this is a Christian Forum. It really doesn't matter what we think about love, but what God says is love. I realize you are an atheist, but as a Christian, this is what love is: I Corinthians 13, the love chapter of the Bible. It's more about how we are to behave toward others than romantic love, or familial love, so it encompasses all forms.

Verses 1-3 talks about what is not love, the nonexample if you will. Speaking beautiful words without love is nothing, knowledge and faith without love is nothing, bestowing all your goods and even giving your body to martyrdom is nothing. All these things are nothing without love.

Verses 4-8 are what love is: It is long suffering, kind, doesn't envy, isn't proud, is not easily provoked, doesn't think evil, doesn't behave unseemly, does not rejoice in iniquity but rejoices in the truth, bears all things, believes all things, hopes all things, endures all things.

God is love.

I wasn't presented because it is not a definition for Love but rather the characteristics of Love. As such, when the poster asked for definitions all we can do is point out how worldly love and Biblical Love are different which I did a long long time ago.

 

[Galatea]

I wasn't presented because it is not a definition for Love but rather the characteristics of Love. As such, when the poster asked for definitions all we can do is point out how worldly love and Biblical Love are different which I did a long long time ago.

I don't know how to separate the definition of love from its characteristics. I kind of think that you can define something by its characteristics. If it has feathers, hollow bones, lays eggs, flies, it is a bird.

 

[razzelflabben]

I don't know how to separate the definition of love from its characteristics. I kind of think that you can define something by its characteristics. If it has feathers, hollow bones, lays eggs, flies, it is a bird.

yes and no...in fact, when I began my study on Biblical Love I would have said the same thing. After years of deep study on the matter I have discovered the difference. Both hold truths, don't get me wrong, but the definition is a bit more....comprehensive to the totality of the topic whereas characteristics show us the practicals if that makes sense.

 

[Ken Rank]

yet that isn't what I said at all...so how would you know what I believe if you refuse to listen to what I say? yep...all I asked was that any response you posted be directed at what I really did say and not what you think I would say if you could control what I type. You failed at that...so we can be done.

Sure, we can be because I still don't know what you said. You made comments about how >>I<< am falling for something but I don't remember what you said... I don't think you said anything. So, yeah... we're done. Be blessed.

 

[razzelflabben]

Sure, we can be because I still don't know what you said. You made comments about how >>I<< am falling for something but I don't remember what you said... I don't think you said anything. So, yeah... we're done. Be blessed.

lol I talked about how the bible talks about death aka hell being the consequence of sin not the punishment for sin and how it is the result of the natural law of a fallen world compared to a holy God. neither of which you addressed and both of which you dismissed in your analysis of me and what I believe. In fact, it appears that you lashed out because I suggested to you that what you were saying about hell is what the teachers teach not what scripture says.

 

[Jack of Spades]

I don't know how to separate the definition of love from its characteristics. I kind of think that you can define something by its characteristics. If it has feathers, hollow bones, lays eggs, flies, it is a bird.

Maybe characteristics are just the feathers and the surface level guide of expressing love? I think love can be seen in it's characteristics, but then again, the characteristics are not the essence of it.

As a mystic, I see the essence of love as something undefinable, that must be experienced to understand it. I believe love is not something we can copy by merely mimicking it's characteristics, that would leave the "love" empty inside.

I believe love is not a skill, but it's essence is somewhere deeper, and while those things listed can be expressions of love, they're not the essence of it.

Am I making sense?

 

[Galatea]

yes and no...in fact, when I began my study on Biblical Love I would have said the same thing. After years of deep study on the matter I have discovered the difference. Both hold truths, don't get me wrong, but the definition is a bit more....comprehensive to the totality of the topic whereas characteristics show us the practicals if that makes sense.

No, it doesn't quite make sense to me. What is the definition, as opposed to just the characteristics or practical side?

 

[razzelflabben]

No, it doesn't quite make sense to me. What is the definition, as opposed to just the characteristics or practical side?

the best definition for Biblical love we can come up with after years of study is...putting another above yourself in an act of humility creating a covenant whose intent/purpose is reconciliation/restoration.

Notice how many different things that definition covers. It includes how it happens, what the result is, what the goal is, etc. If you start looking into the characteristics you will find that the characteristics all fit into that definition. this then removes the often misunderstood aspects of the words for love, the emotion vs. action, etc. It also shows us that whereas the worldly definition of love which is a strong positive emotion has an opposite understanding of hate. Biblical Love is an emotion, an action, and an attitude and more all of which flow out of true humility (think like the humility of Christ here) which means the opposite of Love is not hate but pride which explains why God can be Love and still hate Esau for example.

 

[Galatea]

the best definition for Biblical love we can come up with after years of study is...putting another above yourself in an act of humility creating a covenant whose intent/purpose is reconciliation/restoration.

Notice how many different things that definition covers. It includes how it happens, what the result is, what the goal is, etc. If you start looking into the characteristics you will find that the characteristics all fit into that definition. this then removes the often misunderstood aspects of the words for love, the emotion vs. action, etc. It also shows us that whereas the worldly definition of love which is a strong positive emotion has an opposite understanding of hate. Biblical Love is an emotion, an action, and an attitude and more all of which flow out of true humility (think like the humility of Christ here) which means the opposite of Love is not hate but pride which explains why God can be Love and still hate Esau for example.

Thank you, this makes sense. I just got back from watching Hacksaw Ridge about the true story of Desmond Doss. He was a Christian who saved the lives of 75 men, humble and putting what God wanted and others' needs ahead of his own. I have said for years that love is sacrifice, even if we are sacrificing little things like time when we listen to someone when we'd rather be doing our own thing, etc.
Thanks for responding.

 

[Galatea]

Maybe characteristics are just the feathers and the surface level guide of expressing love? I think love can be seen in it's characteristics, but then again, the characteristics are not the essence of it.

As a mystic, I see the essence of love as something undefinable, that must be experienced to understand it. I believe love is not something we can copy by merely mimicking it's characteristics, that would leave the "love" empty inside.

I believe love is not a skill, but it's essence is somewhere deeper, and while those things listed can be expressions of love, they're not the essence of it.

Am I making sense?

In a way, yes. In a way, no. About making sense, I mean. I agree that in order to know what romantic love is, you have to experience it. I mean, you can read about it, listen to songs about it, watch movies, etc. It is not until you actually fall in love yourself do you know what it is. I think in a way, it is the same thing as being a Christian, which is experiencing the ultimate love. It is something that is not completely understood until it is experienced. I suppose it is the way of all forms of love. You can read about a mother's love, or a father's love, etc. It is not until you actually experience it do you know what it is. Is this what you mean?

 

[Jack of Spades]

In a way, yes. In a way, no. About making sense, I mean. I agree that in order to know what romantic love is, you have to experience it. I mean, you can read about it, listen to songs about it, watch movies, etc. It is not until you actually fall in love yourself do you know what it is. I think in a way, it is the same thing as being a Christian, which is experiencing the ultimate love. It is something that is not completely understood until it is experienced. I suppose it is the way of all forms of love. You can read about a mother's love, or a father's love, etc. It is not until you actually experience it do you know what it is. Is this what you mean?

Yeah, kinda, or maybe not exactly, I'm not sure.

It's the same deal as with, say, joy, and characteristics of joy. Joy can make me jump in the air, but jumping in the air is not joy, and it can be done for some other reasons too, than as a result of joy. It's the same deal with love.

 

[Galatea]

Yeah, kinda, or maybe not exactly, I'm not sure.

It's the same deal as with, say, joy, and characteristics of joy. Joy can make me jump in the air, but jumping in the air is not joy, and it can be done for some other reasons too, than as a result of joy. It's the same deal with love.

That makes sense, I think.

 

[Ken Rank]

lol I talked about how the bible talks about death aka hell being the consequence of sin not the punishment for sin and how it is the result of the natural law of a fallen world compared to a holy God. neither of which you addressed and both of which you dismissed in your analysis of me and what I believe. In fact, it appears that you lashed out because I suggested to you that what you were saying about hell is what the teachers teach not what scripture says.

I don't see "hell" as the consequence of sin, "the wages of sin is death," it doesn't say, "the wages of sin is hell." Adam's punishment was his PHYSICAL death... he was intended to die. Where we read in English, "surely you will die" in the Hebrew it is mut t'mut, which is "dying you will die." It is declaring a PROCESS that leads to death. So this isn't an immediate "spiritual death" but rather a process that began, a clock that began to tick, toward his death. This is why he was removed from the Garden... so that his access to the Tree of Life was cut off. And I see this as an act of grace, can you imagine what Adam would look like after 6000 years of being in a decaying state? Anyway... the wages of sin is death and that is why we decay, get disease, and eventually die.

 

[razzelflabben]

Thank you, this makes sense. I just got back from watching Hacksaw Ridge about the true story of Desmond Doss. He was a Christian who saved the lives of 75 men, humble and putting what God wanted and others' needs ahead of his own. I have said for years that love is sacrifice, even if we are sacrificing little things like time when we listen to someone when we'd rather be doing our own thing, etc.
Thanks for responding.

how is the movie...we would love to see it.

As to sacrifice let me share a small bit of a study that blew my mind. Christ is our high Priest, right? Right The priest made made both sacrifices and offerings. IOW's Christ offered Himself as the sacrificial Lamb but He also offered Himself up for the suffering that would allow us to know that He understands everything we are going through. Love involves both offering (as in praying for others, that is interceding on their behalf) and sacrifice which is a covenant to stay the course, to suffer with them for as long as it takes for Love to finish it's work. Why? Because be are called to be priests...I Peter 2:9...a truly amazing study of how suffering is part of Love, well worth the time.

 

[razzelflabben]

I don't see "hell" as the consequence of sin, "the wages of sin is death," it doesn't say, "the wages of sin is hell."

yep, but we know from the totality of scripture that there are two deaths, the death of the flesh and the death of the spirit or soul and the context tells us which is meant. We also know that death is thrown into the lake of fire which is also known as hell.

Adam's punishment was his PHYSICAL death...

no, go back to Gen. his punishment was weeds, work physical death as well as spiritual death were the consequence of sin. It's actually very clear but seldom taught.

he was intended to die. Where we read in English, "surely you will die" in the Hebrew it is mut t'mut, which is "dying you will die." It is declaring a PROCESS that leads to death. So this isn't an immediate "spiritual death" but rather a process that began, a clock that began to tick, toward his death.

ah...kind of what I said, your just focusing on a different part of the whole. You are trying to make a case for what death here means which requires the totality of scripture which you are not addressing, all the while ignoring the rest of what I said while posting words that tell us you are talking about what is traditionally taught rather than addressing what I am telling you scripture says.

This is why he was removed from the Garden... so that his access to the Tree of Life was cut off.

yep...doesn't change that it was both deaths, in fact, it testifies to the truth of what I am telling you about both a physical and spiritual death.

And I see this as an act of grace, can you imagine what Adam would look like after 6000 years of being in a decaying state? Anyway... the wages of sin is death and that is why we decay, get disease, and eventually die.

yep...but it is also spiritual death as scripture says...but the real problem here is that you want to talk about death when that isn't the point I was even bringing into the discussion it's just the point you need to make to justify your position. I get that you need to justify your position this way, it's understandable but as I said before, if you can't address the points I am making we have nothing more to talk about.

 

[Ken Rank]

yep, but we know from the totality of scripture that there are two deaths, the death of the flesh and the death of the spirit or soul and the context tells us which is meant. We also know that death is thrown into the lake of fire which is also known as hell. no, go back to Gen. his punishment was weeds, work physical death as well as spiritual death were the consequence of sin. It's actually very clear but seldom taught. ah...kind of what I said, your just focusing on a different part of the whole. You are trying to make a case for what death here means which requires the totality of scripture which you are not addressing, all the while ignoring the rest of what I said while posting words that tell us you are talking about what is traditionally taught rather than addressing what I am telling you scripture says. yep...doesn't change that it was both deaths, in fact, it testifies to the truth of what I am telling you about both a physical and spiritual death. yep...but it is also spiritual death as scripture says...but the real problem here is that you want to talk about death when that isn't the point I was even bringing into the discussion it's just the point you need to make to justify your position. I get that you need to justify your position this way, it's understandable but as I said before, if you can't address the points I am making we have nothing more to talk about.

And what is the result of a spiritual death... separation from God? If yes... how does He then covenant with Israel, call David the Apple of His eye? The Hebrew says, and if you don't believe me... go find somebody who reads Hebrew... it is emphatic... mut t'mut... "dying you WILL DIE." It is a process, not an immediate death. That rules out the immediate spiritual death and what does that even mean anyway? Adam was flesh and when the spirit and flesh came together he became a living soul. Remove the spirit and he dies, there, on the spot. It was a physical death... a process, dying you will die.