100% FREE ONLINE DATING
sponsored links
Previous
| Topic: Divine Inspiration | |
|---|---|
|
|
|
God is Love(Agape Love)
The one who does not love does not know God, for God is Love. 1Jn 4:8 God is Love - an aspect, not merely a characteristic. There are 4 kinds of Love: http://paxvobisca.tripod.com/literature/fourLoves.html God's Love: http://www.khouse.org/articles/1998/129/ 
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
I do not consider love to be an emotion although human love is tainted with a lot of negative emotions. Emotions are hate, fear, excitement, anticipation, jealousy, sorrow, disgust, anger etc. Love in its pure form, is pure. It is a bond that binds all things. It is not an emotion. That is just your personal, unconventional, overly simplistic definition of love. Although I do believe actual Love of God or true Love of a life partner is pure and divinely inspired - it is not identical with God. Here is the actual dictionary definition of Love (Merriam Webster): Love a (1) : strong affection for another arising out of kinship or personal ties <maternal love for a child> (2) : attraction based on sexual desire : affection and tenderness felt by lovers (3) : affection based on admiration, benevolence, or common interests <love for his old schoolmates> b : an assurance of affection <give her my love> 2 : warm attachment, enthusiasm, or devotion <love of the sea> 3 a : the object of attachment, devotion, or admiration <baseball was his first love> b (1) : a beloved person : darling —often used as a term of endearment (2) British —used as an informal term of address 4 a : unselfish loyal and benevolent concern for the good of another: as (1) : the fatherly concern of God for humankind (2) : brotherly concern for others b : a person's adoration of God 5 : a god or personification of love 6 : an amorous episode : love affair 7 : the sexual embrace : copulation 8 : a score of zero (as in tennis) 9 capitalized Christian Science : god — at love : holding one's opponent scoreless in tennis — in love : inspired by affection See love defined for English-language learners » See love defined for kids » Examples of LOVE Children need unconditional love from their parents. He was just a lonely man looking for love. Mr. Brown seems to imply that when he retired he relinquished her love as casually as he dispensed with her secretarial services. —Ken Follett, New York Times Book Review, 27 Dec. 1987 [+]more Origin of LOVE Middle English, from Old English lufu; akin to Old High German luba love, Old English lēof dear, Latin lubēre, libēre to please First Known Use: before 12th century Related to LOVE Synonyms: affection, attachment, devotedness, devotion, fondness, passion Antonyms: abomination, hate, hatred, loathing, rancor [+]more |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Edited by
s1owhand
on
Tue 10/11/11 03:01 AM
|
|
God is Love(Agape Love) The one who does not love does not know God, for God is Love. 1Jn 4:8 God is Love - an aspect, not merely a characteristic. There are 4 kinds of Love: http://paxvobisca.tripod.com/literature/fourLoves.html God's Love: http://www.khouse.org/articles/1998/129/
I think that 1Jn 4:8 is one of those instances which requires some interpretation obviously. As you say, the Bible says that God is Love but that means that Love is a part of God not that God is not also many other things in addition to the experience of true Love and devotion! Also, as you say there are many forms of Love and love of nasty things is certainly not Divine. One might say that God's Love is a very special form of love. But again if you say "God's Love" as a description then you are acknowledging that it is a special form of love. As is said other places in the Bible, God is infinite and not definable in human terms at all - certainly not merely in a one word description! That is why God is described many times in different ways by various sources including the Bible. Because we can not adequately sum up God in so many words. This passage merely says that to experience God is also to experience a form of divine love. If you know God then you have experienced love - not that God is limited to a one word description! 
But now that we have a better understanding of God... I think it is fair to say that many beautiful things are in fact inspired by God. 
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
we don't all have a better understanding of god. some of us still see no reason to think god or devine inspiration even exist much less understand it. you folks are doing a fine job of convincing yourselves though.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Co-sign. To me, it's like Francis collins who said he seen three parts of a waterfall frozen and that convinced him of the Abrahamic God (Trinity), he didn't see God, he see what he was looking for, which anything that resemble something magnificent to him = God. a perfect example of each of us seeing things differently. you see what collins saw in the waterfall as inspired by god, as does he. i see him as delusional. suppose he'd said what he saw in the waterfall was inspired by a coke machine that has jammed because somebody crammed too many quarters down the slot. would you agree that he was inpired by a screwed up coke machine? |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
I do not consider love to be an emotion although human love is tainted with a lot of negative emotions. Emotions are hate, fear, excitement, anticipation, jealousy, sorrow, disgust, anger etc. Love in its pure form, is pure. It is a bond that binds all things. It is not an emotion. That is just your personal, unconventional, overly simplistic definition of love. Yes it is my personal opinion. So what? Simplify. I am certain that my understanding of love is sufficient correct for my own purpose and understanding, so I have no need to debate the subject. Although I do believe actual Love of God or true Love of a life partner is pure and divinely inspired - it is not identical with God. Love of a life partner from another human is human romantic love. I did not say it was "identical with God." Here is the actual dictionary definition of Love (Merriam Webster): The "actual" definition of Love by humans is the human understanding of love. Human love does come from divine love but most all human love is tainted with emotions. |
|
|
|
|
|
Edited by
Kleisto
on
Tue 10/11/11 01:25 PM
|
|
The "actual" definition of Love by humans is the human understanding of love. Human love does come from divine love but most all human love is tainted with emotions. Which they then taint God with too, as many of the aspects of the "loving" God of religion are very much human. If God is above us and better than us, he would surely act accordingly. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The "actual" definition of Love by humans is the human understanding of love. Human love does come from divine love but most all human love is tainted with emotions. Which they then taint God with too, as many of the aspects of the "loving" God of religion are very much human. If God is above us and better than us, he would surely act accordingly. but if God is above us how would we even understand that he was 'acting accordingly' as our frame of reference is not identical to his..... |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Edited by
Kleisto
on
Tue 10/11/11 03:49 PM
|
|
The "actual" definition of Love by humans is the human understanding of love. Human love does come from divine love but most all human love is tainted with emotions. Which they then taint God with too, as many of the aspects of the "loving" God of religion are very much human. If God is above us and better than us, he would surely act accordingly. but if God is above us how would we even understand that he was 'acting accordingly' as our frame of reference is not identical to his..... It's simple common sense, if God is supposed to be of love, it's NOT going to do things that totally go against that idea. To say otherwise is to go against logic and good sense. As I say, the religious God is entirely HUMAN in how it acts, not anything divine. It's not going to act the way we do if it's supposed to be above us, and the religious God does just that. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The "actual" definition of Love by humans is the human understanding of love. Human love does come from divine love but most all human love is tainted with emotions. Which they then taint God with too, as many of the aspects of the "loving" God of religion are very much human. If God is above us and better than us, he would surely act accordingly. but if God is above us how would we even understand that he was 'acting accordingly' as our frame of reference is not identical to his..... It's simple common sense, if God is supposed to be of love, it's NOT going to do things that totally go against that idea. To say otherwise is to go against logic and good sense. As I say, the religious God is entirely HUMAN in how it acts, not anything divine. It's not going to act the way we do if it's supposed to be above us, and the religious God does just that. this is a huge and egotistical assumption Because IT is above us , we cannot possibly know how it SHOULD or WOULD Act as our foundation comes from our own limited epxerience and our fleshly knowledge and desires,,, |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Edited by
Kleisto
on
Tue 10/11/11 04:33 PM
|
|
No more egotistical than to say you know what God does and acts like either as the religious claim to do. How can you say you know cause a book says it, and then come down on others for saying something else? That's the pot calling the kettle black right there.
Besides that, we may not fully understand what God is here, but we can know what love is and what love is not. And it is EXTREMELY clear to anyone with half a brain in their head, that the religious God is nothing close to what love is supposed to be, even when compared to its' own definition in the supposed "word". The only way to ever believe that it can be is if you are taught not to question it, and it's true by default. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
No more egotistical than to say you know what God does and acts like either as the religious claim to do. How can you say you know cause a book says it, and then come down on others for saying something else? That's the pot calling the kettle black right there. Besides that, we may not fully understand what God is here, but we can know what love is and what love is not. And it is EXTREMELY clear to anyone with half a brain in their head, that the religious God is nothing close to what love is supposed to be, even when compared to its' own definition in the supposed "word". The only way to ever believe that it can be is if you are taught not to question it, and it's true by default. Your comment about love and the information we possess of God are absolutely incorrect. What has God done and or what knowledge do we possess that shows God not to be loving? Would it be love if God just let us run around like chickens with our heads cut off with no direction, no laws, no guidance? Would it be love if their was no consequence for disobedience? |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
we don't all have a better understanding of god. some of us still see no reason to think god or devine inspiration even exist much less understand it. you folks are doing a fine job of convincing yourselves though. If love exists, then God exists because God IS love. Can you see love or touch it? Does love exist? I know God exists because I exist. I am that. I am that I am. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
No more egotistical than to say you know what God does and acts like either as the religious claim to do. How can you say you know cause a book says it, and then come down on others for saying something else? That's the pot calling the kettle black right there. Besides that, we may not fully understand what God is here, but we can know what love is and what love is not. And it is EXTREMELY clear to anyone with half a brain in their head, that the religious God is nothing close to what love is supposed to be, even when compared to its' own definition in the supposed "word". The only way to ever believe that it can be is if you are taught not to question it, and it's true by default. I say I try to understand what God does, I never say I am on a level to 'judge' it though,, because I dont think I am equal to God enough to understand what HIS FOUNDATION (the place we all have from which we make our decisions and set our priorities) is,,,, or to judge it based upon the foundations of men,,,, |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Edited by
msharmony
on
Wed 10/12/11 12:06 AM
|
|
No more egotistical than to say you know what God does and acts like either as the religious claim to do. How can you say you know cause a book says it, and then come down on others for saying something else? That's the pot calling the kettle black right there. Besides that, we may not fully understand what God is here, but we can know what love is and what love is not. And it is EXTREMELY clear to anyone with half a brain in their head, that the religious God is nothing close to what love is supposed to be, even when compared to its' own definition in the supposed "word". The only way to ever believe that it can be is if you are taught not to question it, and it's true by default. Love is patient and kind; love does not envy or boast; it is not arrogant or rude. It does not insist on its own way; it is not irritable or resentful; it does not rejoice at wrongdoing, but rejoices with the truth. Love bears all things, believes all things, hopes all things, endures all things. Corinthians 13:4-7 biblicly speaking, I see all these attributes in God,,, or there would be no reason for him to have not wiped our entire species out long before now,,, |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
No more egotistical than to say you know what God does and acts like either as the religious claim to do. How can you say you know cause a book says it, and then come down on others for saying something else? That's the pot calling the kettle black right there. Besides that, we may not fully understand what God is here, but we can know what love is and what love is not. And it is EXTREMELY clear to anyone with half a brain in their head, that the religious God is nothing close to what love is supposed to be, even when compared to its' own definition in the supposed "word". The only way to ever believe that it can be is if you are taught not to question it, and it's true by default. Love is patient and kind; love does not envy or boast; it is not arrogant or rude. It does not insist on its own way; it is not irritable or resentful; it does not rejoice at wrongdoing, but rejoices with the truth. Love bears all things, believes all things, hopes all things, endures all things. Corinthians 13:4-7 biblicly speaking, I see all these attributes in God,,, or there would be no reason for him to have not wiped our entire species out long before now,,, Nevermind the fact that it did once, and also allows for torture forever, among other evils. So no, the Biblical God fails its' own test of love, you just try and justify it. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
No more egotistical than to say you know what God does and acts like either as the religious claim to do. How can you say you know cause a book says it, and then come down on others for saying something else? That's the pot calling the kettle black right there. Besides that, we may not fully understand what God is here, but we can know what love is and what love is not. And it is EXTREMELY clear to anyone with half a brain in their head, that the religious God is nothing close to what love is supposed to be, even when compared to its' own definition in the supposed "word". The only way to ever believe that it can be is if you are taught not to question it, and it's true by default. Love is patient and kind; love does not envy or boast; it is not arrogant or rude. It does not insist on its own way; it is not irritable or resentful; it does not rejoice at wrongdoing, but rejoices with the truth. Love bears all things, believes all things, hopes all things, endures all things. Corinthians 13:4-7 biblicly speaking, I see all these attributes in God,,, or there would be no reason for him to have not wiped our entire species out long before now,,, Nevermind the fact that it did once, and also allows for torture forever, among other evils. So no, the Biblical God fails its' own test of love, you just try and justify it. it didnt, wipe out the entire race,, even once,,, so it has failed nothing |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Edited by
Kleisto
on
Wed 10/12/11 12:24 AM
|
|
Then I guess you're gonna ignore Noah's Ark and the great flood huh? How very convenient of you. But not surprised, it's typical.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Then I guess you're gonna ignore Noah's Ark and the great flood huh? How very convenient of you. But not surprised, it's typical. IF the entire race were wiped out in the flood,, what race was noahs family,, and the humans that repopulated? |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Ok but the fact is, God STILL wiped out an entire populace, and you can not tell me mass murder basically such as that is love, because it's flat not. Some acts simply cannot be justified I don't give a damn how many times you try.
|
|
|
|
|
