What is love?

[razzelflabben]

First, can you try and write more concisely because you are given to rambling.

(maybe if you reflected anything I say in my posts in your posts I could make shorter paragraphs)

By the time you've written 4 or 5 lines you've totally wondered off any point you were thinking of making and we're just left with another massive paragraph full of irrelevant, loopy, nonsense.

ah, someone who doesn't like reading, but thinks a forum of text is a good fit...got it. You don't want to read what is said, cause that makes it easier for you to get around the things you don't want to accept.

OK, you finish by saying that you want to talk about your god having a different concept of death to us mere humans as a way of explaining/excusing his passion for murder.

I finished by saying I want to talk about Love as per the OP not your misrepresentations of a God you clearly have posted as not liking.

I also have told you many times over that none of my discussion is about excusing anything God does, much less judge it and still you go off about excusing what He did....really, you do need to stop with the misrepresentations before it turns into flaming.

So go for it. And yes, we are talking about physical death, as in killing people.

as I said, in God's perspective, physical death is nothing more than (as the saying goes today) a change of address.

So, more "rambling" to explain what I am saying since you repeatedly miss it and I need to clarify everything....scripture tells the believer that this world is not our home, that the eternal nature provides the persons really home. This is compounded by the idea that this life is said to be just a vapor. One could look at it as God sped up the change of address these people would have, you know, He helped them move faster than they would have without the help. From God's perspective that was all there was to it. A help with moving from a temporary home to an eternal more permanent home. Next time you are moving, make sure not to call anyone to help, cause apparently in your eyes, that is evil....now, like I said, that does not justify what happened, all it does is show God's thought process, His mindset on the whole thing. Whether you agree or disagree is irrelevant to what His mindset was at the time.

Now, I have said it about a dozen times, how about if you allow your responses to reflect what was said?

You wish to make the case that killing people is OK for your god,

now, I have said this so many times and you just keep ignoring it, so let me cap it, hoping you will read it because it stands out.....JUST BECAUSE WE SEE SOMETHING FROM ANOTHERS PERSPECTIVE DOES NOT MEAN THAT WE ARE SAYING IT IS GOOD, OKAY, JUSTIFIED, THAT I AGREE WITH IT OR ANY OTHER FORM OF NON SENSE YOU KEEP TRYING TO CLAIM....TO KNOW HOW I FEEL ABOUT IT IS ANOTHER DISCUSSION COMPLETELY, ONE THAT IS NOT APPROPRIATE FOR THIS THREAD.

because all the people he kills go to happyland in the sky afterwards. Well, apart from the ones he kills because he's angry of course, which would be all us them. But his anger is really just love in disguise isn't it?

I have 5 kids, they are mostly grown now, but I have over the years gotten very angry at some of the things they did. Things that if I had not loved them, wouldn't have bothered me at all. It was because I loved them that I got angry at their behavior. Even today, my Love occasionally produces an anger at their behavior. I don't know if you have kids, but I'm pretty sure you have parents Do you really believe that every time they got angry with you it was because they hated you instead of Loving you? If that is what you believe, we really seriously need to have a crash course in Love before we move on.

Anyway, for some reason the straightforward concept of a loving god who doesn't need to kill anyone is out of the question. Can't imagine why but there we are. I know, you go ahead. Make your case. Concisely.

Don't have a clue what you think you are saying here. So far, you have reinvented the God of the bible to fit your opinions and then tried to engage us in a discussion of the real God of the Bible and gotten upset because the two were not the same God. That is at best dishonest and at worse inflammatory. How about putting down the fake twisted ideas of who God is and actually discuss for a moment the God of the Bible that you claim to be referring to. It would make the discussion flow much better and would help to keep us on topic. Otherwise you just sounds like and angry atheist on a christian board trying to stir trouble and inflame negative emotions, like that gives you some kind of high or something.

 

[razzelflabben]

duplicate, sorry

 

[Armoured]

Baby don't hurt me, don't hurt me, no more...

 

[Mr Strawberry]

(maybe if you reflected anything I say in my posts in your posts I could make shorter paragraphs) ah, someone who doesn't like reading, but thinks a forum of text is a good fit...got it. You don't want to read what is said, cause that makes it easier for you to get around the things you don't want to accept. I finished by saying I want to talk about Love as per the OP not your misrepresentations of a God you clearly have posted as not liking.

I just assumed that swamping people with a mass of nebulous text was your debating tactic, rather like squashing someone under a bouncy castle.

I also have told you many times over that none of my discussion is about excusing anything God does, much less judge it and still you go off about excusing what He did....really, you do need to stop with the misrepresentations before it turns into flaming. as I said, in God's perspective, physical death is nothing more than (as the saying goes today) a change of address.

So you have no opinion one way or the other about your god's penchant for killing in the old testament? Correct?

So, more "rambling" to explain what I am saying since you repeatedly miss it and I need to clarify everything....scripture tells the believer that this world is not our home, that the eternal nature provides the persons really home. This is compounded by the idea that this life is said to be just a vapor. One could look at it as God sped up the change of address these people would have, you know, He helped them move faster than they would have without the help. From God's perspective that was all there was to it. A help with moving from a temporary home to an eternal more permanent home. Next time you are moving, make sure not to call anyone to help, cause apparently in your eyes, that is evil....now, like I said, that does not justify what happened, all it does is show God's thought process, His mindset on the whole thing. Whether you agree or disagree is irrelevant to what His mindset was at the time.

Do you suppose helping them into a more permanent home is your god's motive for all the people he kills in the old testament? Have you seen the list of people he kills in the old testament? It's a long list of large numbers. Was all that just your god helping people along rather like helping an old lady cross the road? Seriously? That's what you are saying is it?

Now, I have said it about a dozen times, how about if you allow your responses to reflect what was said? now, I have said this so many times and you just keep ignoring it, so let me cap it, hoping you will read it because it stands out.....JUST BECAUSE WE SEE SOMETHING FROM ANOTHERS PERSPECTIVE DOES NOT MEAN THAT WE ARE SAYING IT IS GOOD, OKAY, JUSTIFIED, THAT I AGREE WITH IT OR ANY OTHER FORM OF NON SENSE YOU KEEP TRYING TO CLAIM....TO KNOW HOW I FEEL ABOUT IT IS ANOTHER DISCUSSION COMPLETELY, ONE THAT IS NOT APPROPRIATE FOR THIS THREAD.

How do you feel about it? Obviously if you think that love is involved you are defending him. There's no debate about that. Or is there some disapproval of your god's killings lurking deep down in there somewhere? You can tell us you know. We won't tell your god.

I have 5 kids, they are mostly grown now, but I have over the years gotten very angry at some of the things they did. Things that if I had not loved them, wouldn't have bothered me at all. It was because I loved them that I got angry at their behavior. Even today, my Love occasionally produces an anger at their behavior. I don't know if you have kids, but I'm pretty sure you have parents Do you really believe that every time they got angry with you it was because they hated you instead of Loving you? If that is what you believe, we really seriously need to have a crash course in Love before we move on.

It's simple: would you ever murder one of your children? Let's assume the answer is yes. Now, would you murder one of them if you were omnipotent? i.e. you could do ANYTHING other than killing them. Literally. You could do ANYTHING. Absolutely no limit on options. Think about that. Still going for the murder option? But you are not just omnipotent, ho no. Would you murder one of them if you were omniscient as well? i.e. you knew before your child was even conceived that you will kill it at a later date because it is going to do something that makes you angry/wrathful (check list of reasons for god killing people in old testament - choose one at random, let's say onanism shall we? Apply it to example).

Now think about that. This is the problem with the child parent analogy. Are you beginning to grasp the problem? Little glimmer of light being glimpsed? The distant tinkle of a penny dropping?

Don't have a clue what you think you are saying here. So far, you have reinvented the God of the bible to fit your opinions and then tried to engage us in a discussion of the real God of the Bible and gotten upset because the two were not the same God. That is at best dishonest and at worse inflammatory. How about putting down the fake twisted ideas of who God is and actually discuss for a moment the God of the Bible that you claim to be referring to. It would make the discussion flow much better and would help to keep us on topic. Otherwise you just sounds like and angry atheist on a christian board trying to stir trouble and inflame negative emotions, like that gives you some kind of high or something.

The idea of a loving god who doesn't need to kill anyone seems to confuse you. And from the above it makes you retreat into defensive, slightly paranoid mode. Is the idea of a loving god who doesn't need to kill anyone really so difficult? Is it so challenging for you? Frightening even?

Go on, try it out for size: a loving god who doesn't need to kill anyone. How about taking it even further? A loving god who would never kill anyone. How about that? Does that begin to sound like a more rational, sane god? Now compare that god with yours.

 

[com7fy8]

1) Reductionist Materialism: Will describe the biological systems involved , heightened levels of specific chemicals in specific areas etc

Yes - - - I understand there are people who claim that there is only physical stuff in existence. And, "therefore", they claim that all emotions and feelings are the result of atoms and molecules and physical principles acting together to produce our love and anger and other deeper things. But it seems like atoms and molecules have no feelings; so how would unfeeling atoms and molecules be able to produce us humans who have feelings??

And I notice how humans with such intelligence can't even figure out an atom, never mind their body and human personality and psychology. So, are atoms and molecules smarter than humans? For a person who believes in only material existence, I would think it would be "logical" to consider that atoms and molecules might be conscious individuals smarter than humans, but not with human feelings. And so it might be logical that humans inside our bodies are spiritual blobs > It could seem logical that a bunch of atoms and molecules made themselves into human bodies, for the fun of it, and they have locked us up in our bodies and made us prisoners while they play us around . . . in our endless and silly effort to try to control physical things in order to be happy.

But it never works. Humans can have our way of never getting our way.

So, if someone believes only in physical existence, I'd think one possibility of "logic" is that we are poor little blobs trapped by atoms and molecules which are beings of intelligence higher than we have. But I do not know of anyone who claims to be logical who has come up with this "possibility".

You would "think" that principles of physics would produce a living being as intelligent as the atoms and molecules and principles producing that human . . . if a human were totally physical. I think, since this is not the case, that emotions are from deeper than physical; so are our minds.

But the actions of our minds and emotions show through our physical bodies.

So, I understand that unselfish love comes from deeper than atoms and molecules and the principles of physics acting through "evolution".

But there is selfish love, i.e-e-e-e, using others to get things and pleasures we treasure. This sort of love has us using people, favoring mainly or only those people and things and pets which we feel we can use. So, this comes from selfishness. Ones are desperate for pleasure so they can feel good, and feel "alive". And so, in this sort of loving, they can be weak so they also can suffer deep misery and have horrible ways of reacting to not getting their own way. I don't think atoms and molecules produced this!!

And so, the real love is in God and He shares His love with us > Romans 5:5.

Can I define this? m m m m m m

You can consider 1 Corinthians 13. And I offer that effects of God's love include how we experience Him in His love, and His love makes us strong against nasty and negative reacting. And we are so satisfied, that we are not desperate for pleasure and things and people to use to try to make us feel good. And because we are deeply content with God (Matthew 11:28-30), we can readily be concerned about others, since we ourselves are taken care of by Him. And His love makes us able to be intimate with any other person in this love, but ready to adopt others who are not capable of this intimacy; we have hope for how God can correct any other person to also find out how to love. And we were not like this without God; so we know He can do this for any person, at all, if He succeeded at changing our character

 

[razzelflabben]

I just assumed that swamping people with a mass of nebulous text was your debating tactic, rather like squashing someone under a bouncy castle.

ignored as inflammatory.

So you have no opinion one way or the other about your god's penchant for killing in the old testament? Correct?

did I say I have no opinion? NO! I SAID THAT THIS THREAD IS NOT THE PROPER PLACE TO DISCUSS WHETHER OR NOT GOD WAS JUSTIFIED, IT WAS GOOD, IT WAS EVIL, IT WAS FAIR, ETC. that to discuss that would be off topic completely and would have to be addressed someplace else.

That was pretty concise and you still didn't read it and respond to what I said.

Do you suppose helping them into a more permanent home is your god's motive for all the people he kills in the old testament? Have you seen the list of people he kills in the old testament? It's a long list of large numbers. Was all that just your god helping people along rather like helping an old lady cross the road? Seriously? That's what you are saying is it?

huh? We are talking about Love. The only way we can make a discussion about the OT killings as they apply to Love is to look at the perspective of the one that did the killing. Nothing more or less. That is what my uphill battle with you has been, 1. getting you to respond to what was said and 2. getting you to stay on topic rather than stray into off topic issues. Both are violations of forum rules, and yet I patiently try to keep you on task. What was the first characteristic of Love listed in I Cor. 13? Oh, that's right, Love is patient...hum...so let's look at the killings in the OT....remember, according to I Cor. 13, the Love we are applying to the issues, Love is patient. We see throughout the OT a God who was very patient with the people that He killed or had killed. In fact, sometimes it would seem that He was almost patient to a fault. Of course that isn't all the characteristics of Love in I Cor. 13, but I'm guessing you want to go off on this one for awhile before we can even attempt to see if the others apply.

How do you feel about it? Obviously if you think that love is involved you are defending him. There's no debate about that. Or is there some disapproval of your god's killings lurking deep down in there somewhere? You can tell us you know. We won't tell your god.

It's off topic and getting off topic is against forum rules....I followed the line of conversation one time and someone didn't like it, reported me for getting off topic and I got a warning...learned my lesson, following the discussion is not always a wise thing to do. As to God knowing, He knew what I would believe before I believed it, which is one thing you seem to be missing. If God is omni- He knows what will happen, preventing something terrible is not the evil you make it out to be, but you try to judge God without knowing what evils He was preventing that He knew would be coming? How is that logical? God saw what you cannot nor could, yet you feel justified to judge Him because He had info you can't have...that is insanity rather than wisdom.

But, I guess I let the cat out of the bag...sorry forum rules and mods...I don't believe we have a right to judge whether God was right or wrong in killing those people in the OT because we do not have the same information that He did/does. Therefore we have no right or authority to judge it, only to learn from it all that we can learn and in the case of the OP discussion, whether or not in God's perspective, Love was shown.

It's simple: would you ever murder one of your children? Let's assume the answer is yes. Now, would you murder one of them if you were omnipotent? i.e. you could do ANYTHING other than killing them. Literally. You could do ANYTHING. Absolutely no limit on options. Think about that. Still going for the murder option? But you are not just omnipotent, ho no. Would you murder one of them if you were omniscient as well? i.e. you knew before your child was even conceived that you will kill it at a later date because it is going to do something that makes you angry/wrathful (check list of reasons for god killing people in old testament - choose one at random, let's say onanism shall we? Apply it to example).

wow...from God's perspective, those that were killed were not His children, so your question is....once again off topic...(nicest way I know how to put it) BTW, I know this is off topic, but in our world, people kill their children all the time and call it justified, it's called abortion. But again, that is a totally different discussion, so back to topic. Equating God to killing His children is not valid, in His perspective He was protecting His children, killing the rapist and murderers.

Now think about that. This is the problem with the child parent analogy. Are you beginning to grasp the problem? Little glimmer of light being glimpsed? The distant tinkle of a penny dropping?

Not a problem because God didn't kill His children, He killed the rapist and murderers....see the problem with your assertions that we talk about a different god while pretending to talk about the God of the bible...it makes you look uninformed and silly at the best. Inflammatory and hostile at the worst.

The idea of a loving god who doesn't need to kill anyone seems to confuse you. And from the above it makes you retreat into defensive, slightly paranoid mode. Is the idea of a loving god who doesn't need to kill anyone really so difficult? Is it so challenging for you? Frightening even?

Who did He kill? Like I said, the physical death to God is not the same as it is to you or the true believers. It's just changing homes...so no death. In fact, the spiritual death is not at God's hands either, it is at our own. He as judge hands down the sentence, He does not condemn us, we condemn ourselves. You really need to at this point in our conversation begin to grasp some of this. Even if you don't agree with it, it is well documented in scripture therefore is the real God of the bible, not the made up version you keep asking us to talk about.

Go on, try it out for size: a loving god who doesn't need to kill anyone. How about taking it even further? A loving god who would never kill anyone. How about that? Does that begin to sound like a more rational, sane god? Now compare that god with yours.

Sounds like the God of the bible if you understand His perspective, so apparently it isn't the God of the bible you have a problem with but the made up god you are trying to insist God is.

 

[mindlight]

In essence: Why does a "loving God" allow so much pain, death and suffering and indeed with judgments like the flood cause it?

In your view the story of what our God does is measured against a table of values that imply killing is mainly always wrong , that we all have a right to live lives opposed to Gods will and that it would be petty of an omnipotent God to kill those who disagree with Him and definitely not loving.

People have tried to explain to you that one of the first premises of a person who believes in the supernatural is that physical death is more a "change of address" than an irrevocable ending. But for a reductionist materialist this cannot by definition be true as the physical is all.

But just suppose for one moment that there is a ghost in the machinery of our bodies. That the departure of this ghost signals the end of our lives as perceived in the physical does not mean that the consciousness that characterised this person is then extinguished. Then we are faced with a moral table of values that must reckon with a world that we can see and a world that we cannot. Even without accepting the existence of God this does enlarge the view of what is right and what is wrong. The fact of death becomes less important than the manner of it for instance. Since this is a transition that we all seem to take and love for each other must be measured in that larger context.

The Christian God is not unjust, is the only one who can truly be called good and is the model of what love is. But if you attempt to understand Him by trying to squeeze Him into the restrictive boundaries set by reductive materialism them you will misunderstand Him.

 

[Loudmouth]

People have tried to explain to you that one of the first premises of a person who believes in the supernatural is that physical death is more a "change of address" than an irrevocable ending.

Then why throw people into jail for murder if it is no big deal?

But just suppose for one moment that there is a ghost in the machinery of our bodies.

Present evidence and we will consider it.

The Christian God is not unjust, is the only one who can truly be called good and is the model of what love is. But if you attempt to understand Him by trying to squeeze Him into the restrictive boundaries set by reductive materialism them you will misunderstand Him.

We are requiring God to follow the same morality we expect our fellow human beings to follow. What is wrong with that?

 

[razzelflabben]

Then why throw people into jail for murder if it is no big deal?

I know this isn't directed at me, but let me answer some of it for you. The discussion is not about whether or not murder or jail is preferred, better, good, bad, etc. The discussion is about whether or not God's actions were based on Love, in this case Biblical Love rather than the other two mentioned in the OP. Thus we have to understand God's perspective. If you want to bring God's perspective into the issue of Jail, we could say that hell is like jail in the perspective of God. It could be argued that the bossom of Abraham or hades is, but all that would be way off topic, so to shorted the discussion and try to keep on topic, by killing the people He did, God was putting them in jail if we insist on a jail/death analogy to prove a point. I personally think that misses too much of the issue, but it would fit well with someone who isn't following the argument.

Present evidence and we will consider it.

the only evidence needed for this part of this discussion is God's perspective. The idea of a spiritual part to man is all over scripture. I'll find some choice scriptures if you want. The point however, is that when discussing whether or not God's actions were just or right or good or whatever, it is only necessary to know God's perspective, not to have conclusive evidence of whether or not His perspective is right. Thus no evidence is needed for the spirit/eternal part of man other than a few passages that show that to be God's perspective.

We are requiring God to follow the same morality we expect our fellow human beings to follow. What is wrong with that?

From His perspective, He did and then added more Love on top of it. But as I also have repeatedly stated, understanding God's perspective doesn't mean it is right or wrong or that we have to agree, it merely means we understand why He did what He did and why He sees it as an act of Love.

Of course that also means we need to understand what the Love He claims to have been using really is.

 

[razzelflabben]

did it again, darn this new format, sorry for the duplicate.

 

[mindlight]

Then why throw people into jail for murder if it is no big deal?

There are Christians who stress the rehabilitationary aspects of justice and those that stress the retributionary or deterrant aspects of it. These positions all have a measure of biblical justification. In extreme cases I favour the death penalty and may God have mercy on their souls.

Present evidence and we will consider it.

You need a larger range of evidence to deal with this topic than you admit. You need to trust the words of those who do not inhabit your peer group. Revelation, Observation and Deduction are all valid forms of evidence.

We are requiring God to follow the same morality we expect our fellow human beings to follow. What is wrong with that?

"requiring God".... ahhh ok understood. What authority do you claim for this extraordinary demand?

As a true reductive materialist I would guess you are trusting the peer reviewed evidence of your senses combined with the mathematics level - human 1.01. Then reviewing evidence collated from several thousand years of research gathered from a tiny fraction of the known (let alone unknown) universe.

Compared to an eternal , perfect, far wiser and omniscient God it is a poor source of authority really.

 

[faroukfarouk]

did it again, darn this new format, sorry for the duplicate.

I find that sometimes the notification email facility doesn't work, either. But I guess no big deal!

John 3.16 is I think the biggest love subject of all!

 

[razzelflabben]

I find that sometimes the notification email facility doesn't work, either. But I guess no big deal!

John 3.16 is I think the biggest love subject of all!

John 3:16 is how we know what Love is, but it is just a starting point for understanding what all is involved in Biblical Love.

 

[faroukfarouk]

John 3:16 is how we know what Love is, but it is just a starting point for understanding what all is involved in Biblical Love.

John's Epistle goes into divine love a lot more.

 

[razzelflabben]

John's Epistle goes into divine love a lot more.

yep, and still doesn't even scratch the surface, it really is that huge.

 

[Loudmouth]

I know this isn't directed at me, but let me answer some of it for you. The discussion is not about whether or not murder or jail is preferred, better, good, bad, etc. The discussion is about whether or not God's actions were based on Love, in this case Biblical Love rather than the other two mentioned in the OP. Thus we have to understand God's perspective. If you want to bring God's perspective into the issue of Jail, we could say that hell is like jail in the perspective of God. It could be argued that the bossom of Abraham or hades is, but all that would be way off topic, so to shorted the discussion and try to keep on topic, by killing the people He did, God was putting them in jail if we insist on a jail/death analogy to prove a point. I personally think that misses too much of the issue, but it would fit well with someone who isn't following the argument. the only evidence needed for this part of this discussion is God's perspective. The idea of a spiritual part to man is all over scripture. I'll find some choice scriptures if you want. The point however, is that when discussing whether or not God's actions were just or right or good or whatever, it is only necessary to know God's perspective, not to have conclusive evidence of whether or not His perspective is right. Thus no evidence is needed for the spirit/eternal part of man other than a few passages that show that to be God's perspective.From His perspective, He did and then added more Love on top of it. But as I also have repeatedly stated, understanding God's perspective doesn't mean it is right or wrong or that we have to agree, it merely means we understand why He did what He did and why He sees it as an act of Love.

The idea that genocide is born out of love is nothing more than a logical pretzel meant to cover up a very bad problem with scripture.

Of course that also means we need to understand what the Love He claims to have been using really is.

After a while, it sounds like a beaten wife explaining how her husband beats her out of love.

 

[faroukfarouk]

The idea that genocide is born out of love is nothing more than a logical pretzel meant to cover up a very bad problem with scripture.



After a while, it sounds like a beaten wife explaining how her husband beats her out of love.

Since you as a self declared agnostic are really saying that you can't receive the love of God, then your efforts to pick holes in God's revelation of Himself are somewhat problematic, aren't they?

 

[faroukfarouk]

yep, and still doesn't even scratch the surface, it really is that huge.

There's a vast scope in the 'so' of 'For God SO loved...(etc.)...'

 

[razzelflabben]

The idea that genocide is born out of love is nothing more than a logical pretzel meant to cover up a very bad problem with scripture.

unless of course the "genocide" is not viewed as a "genocide" at all, which is the perspective you were told that God holds. But instead of dealing with that in this discussion and showing how God's perspective did not show Love, you just insist that God didn't have such a perspective because it isn't your perspective.

If I wrote characters like you are trying to rewrite God, nothing interesting would ever happen in the story that would make anyone want to pick it up and read it. In order for a story to have dimension, it is necessary for us to reveal different perspectives. So, in this discussion, using God's perspective of it not being our idea of "genocide" at all, but rather it being judgment and jail time, how is it a lack of Love. Remember, in order to play this game that has been started here, you can't change God's perspective, you can only work with the perspective He has provided.

This is about to get interesting....

After a while, it sounds like a beaten wife explaining how her husband beats her out of love.

Hum, except we aren't talking about beating anyone or killing anyone, we are talking about putting child molesters and murderers in jail. At least from God's perspective, so how is it unloving to put prevent a child molester and murderer from continuing on their evil path by putting them in jail? I'm interested to see how you rationalize that as not being an act of love...seriously I am very interested in your justification for that.

 

[Loudmouth]

Since you as a self declared agnostic are really saying that you can't receive the love of God, then your efforts to pick holes in God's revelation of Himself are somewhat problematic, aren't they?

I am saying that the God you and the Bible describe is immoral. If there is some brainwashing or self-delusion where you turn genocide into love, then you have a real problem.