Does God get a fail...
 
Notifications
Clear all

Does God get a fail in the love category?

34 Posts
7 Users
0 Reactions
4,702 Views
Posts: 19
Topic starter
(@greatest-i-am)
Active Member
Joined: 12 years ago

Does God get a fail in the love category?

All will agree that in loving someone, that love must be shown in works, deeds and actions. This allows for reciprocity which is what makes what would be a one way corrupted love a true two way love.

Believers see God as the greatest lover of mankind yet he does no works or deeds to show us that he loves us.

Love, like faith, without works and deeds is dead. That’s scripture. Love, to be true love, must be shown by works, deeds and actions. The fact that God does not show his love by works, deeds and actions at a personal or collective level means that God does not love us. Some are going to point to the notion that God created them but remember that that is not a provable claim so please do not offer it. Remember that way too high of a percentage of us are born with defects.

Do you believe that God loves us?

Why or why not?

------------------------------

God is also said to love us unconditionally. Yet if we do not love, honor, obey and believe in him, we are condemned and punished. Those are all conditions we must meet to get his love returned to us.

Does God love us unconditionally?

------------------------------

Love and morals developed to enhance interaction and living within groups of people and perhaps other entities.
God was alone and did not need to develop morals and could not love anyone because he was alone for untold millennia.

Is God even able to love?

Regards
DL

33 Replies
NICE_1
Posts: 1165
(@nice_1)
Noble Member
Joined: 14 years ago

The fact that God does not show his love by works, deeds and actions at a personal or collective level means that God does not love us.

Hi . 🙂

Some who believe in God may believe the opposite to be true .

Whose perception is anymore or less true / accurate .

From where does any such facts derive from ?

Not from God . lol .

x daz x

Reply
NICE_1
Posts: 1165
(@nice_1)
Noble Member
Joined: 14 years ago

The man whispered, "God, speak to me"
and a meadowlark sang.

But, the man did not hear.

So the man yelled, "God, speak to me"
and the thunder rolled across the sky.

But, the man did not listen.

The man looked around and said,
"God let me see you.."
And a star shone brightly.

But the man did not see.

And, the man shouted,
"God show me a miracle.."
And, a life was born.

But, the man did not notice.

So, the man cried out in despair,
"Touch me God, and let me know you are here."
Whereupon, God reached down and touched the man.
But, the man brushed the butterfly away .

and walked on..

Reply
thehermit
Posts: 1390
(@thehermit)
Noble Member
Joined: 20 years ago

And that is why we have perception
Maybe he just gave us too much
And with our power of free thought
We now fail to see the obvious around us

Reply
Energylz
Posts: 16602
(@energylz)
Member
Joined: 21 years ago

Does God get a fail in the love category?

All will agree that in loving someone, that love must be shown in works, deeds and actions. This allows for reciprocity which is what makes what would be a one way corrupted love a true two way love.



Ermm... not all. I disagree.

The Love that you are referring to is "conditional love", not "true love". True love is unconditional. True Love does not require a reciprocity, it is given without conditions or expectations.


Believers see God as the greatest lover of mankind yet he does no works or deeds to show us that he loves us.



Do you believe in God?
If so, you say that you believe him to be the greatest lover of mankind, but if you don't then you cannot say "he does no works or deeds to show us" because he doesn't exist to do so. You can't have it both ways, either you believe in God (in which case you believe he's the greatest lover and your question of this thread is pointless), or you're a disbeliever so you cannot expect any proof of such works or deeds.


Love, like faith, without works and deeds is dead. That’s scripture. Love, to be true love, must be shown by works, deeds and actions.


You are placing conditions on true love. True love exists, but people place conditions on it and corrupt it into conditional love through their own dualistic wants and needs. True Love doesn't have to be shown, it only has to be recognised within ourselves.


The fact that God does not show his love by works, deeds and actions at a personal or collective level means that God does not love us. Some are going to point to the notion that God created them but remember that that is not a provable claim so please do not offer it. Remember that way too high of a percentage of us are born with defects.


So the "notion" that God created people is not a provable claim, but it's a "fact" that God does not show his love and thus he doesn't love us? I would suggest that neither are able to be proven, and the argument fails on that point, and you're the one that offered it.

What is a "defect"? Would you say someone born with downs syndome is defective? Or someone born blind is "defective"? etc. It is only in your eyes and own social judgement that you deem such people to be defective? You could say that God has given them life, and that is Love, but just because you perceive that those people are defective does not make them so, as no two people are identical, so that is just your own judgmental attitude, and using your own judgment to argue against God showing Love is flawed.


Do you believe that God loves us?

Why or why not?


No I don't, because I don't believe in God in the sense of God being some seperate entity as the usual churches teach. I do however, understand how True Love can exist if the judgements and dualistic ideas and attitudes are let go.



God is also said to love us unconditionally. Yet if we do not love, honor, obey and believe in him, we are condemned and punished. Those are all conditions we must meet to get his love returned to us.

Does God love us unconditionally?


It is unproven that God said anything. It is also unproven that people are condemned and punished. I can just as easily say that God is all-forgiving, as taught in some religions, so whether people believe in him or not, whether they love him or not, whether they honour or obey him or not... all will be forgiven, and that is the unconditional love of God. Such fearmongering of condemnation and punishment comes from certain 'teachings' of certian 'churches' or religious movements, and can be said to come from the teachings of the devil, not God.


Love and morals developed to enhance interaction and living within groups of people and perhaps other entities.
God was alone and did not need to develop morals and could not love anyone because he was alone for untold millennia.

Is God even able to love?


Sorry, but where have you got this unsubstantiated 'information' from?
If God is in everyone (as many teach) then God is not alone. If God exists in everything, then God has never been alone.
You appear to be imparting your own social ideas onto the concept of God and make vast assumptions because of that. For example, you are assuming that a lack of love occurs due to someone/God being alone, yet how do you know that God was not completely full of love (or that God is just Love) in his own presence.

The whole question seems completely flawed and based on your own assumptions and preconceptions from your own understanding of human social behaviour.

Even as someone who does not believe in God per se, I can understand the teachings and concepts put forward by the Bible and other scriptures, and it seems to me that you are just reading things into those teachings that are not really there.

All Love and Reiki Hugs

Reply
Posts: 19
Topic starter
(@greatest-i-am)
Active Member
Joined: 12 years ago

Hi . 🙂

Some who believe in God may believe the opposite to be true .

Whose perception is anymore or less true / accurate .

From where does any such facts derive from ?

Not from God . lol .

x daz x

Too short for me to even understand what you said but to your first, if so, then they are fools.

And that answer is just a guess since your reply is so vague as to be near useless.

Either you planned that or your own honest answer you did not like and tried to offer this instead and ended with foolishness.

Care to try and do it right?

Regards
DL

Reply
Posts: 19
Topic starter
(@greatest-i-am)
Active Member
Joined: 12 years ago

And that is why we have perception
Maybe he just gave us too much
And with our power of free thought
We now fail to see the obvious around us

A nice firm answer.

Maybe, perhaps, there is a possibility, maybe not, that you are right.

Regards
DL

Reply
Posts: 19
Topic starter
(@greatest-i-am)
Active Member
Joined: 12 years ago

Ermm... not all. I disagree.

The Love that you are referring to is "conditional love", not "true love". True love is unconditional. True Love does not require a reciprocity, it is given without conditions or expectations.

Do you believe in God?
If so, you say that you believe him to be the greatest lover of mankind, but if you don't then you cannot say "he does no works or deeds to show us" because he doesn't exist to do so. You can't have it both ways, either you believe in God (in which case you believe he's the greatest lover and your question of this thread is pointless), or you're a disbeliever so you cannot expect any proof of such works or deeds.

You are placing conditions on true love. True love exists, but people place conditions on it and corrupt it into conditional love through their own dualistic wants and needs. True Love doesn't have to be shown, it only has to be recognised within ourselves.

So the "notion" that God created people is not a provable claim, but it's a "fact" that God does not show his love and thus he doesn't love us? I would suggest that neither are able to be proven, and the argument fails on that point, and you're the one that offered it.

What is a "defect"? Would you say someone born with downs syndome is defective? Or someone born blind is "defective"? etc. It is only in your eyes and own social judgement that you deem such people to be defective? You could say that God has given them life, and that is Love, but just because you perceive that those people are defective does not make them so, as no two people are identical, so that is just your own judgmental attitude, and using your own judgment to argue against God showing Love is flawed.

No I don't, because I don't believe in God in the sense of God being some seperate entity as the usual churches teach. I do however, understand how True Love can exist if the judgements and dualistic ideas and attitudes are let go.

It is unproven that God said anything. It is also unproven that people are condemned and punished. I can just as easily say that God is all-forgiving, as taught in some religions, so whether people believe in him or not, whether they love him or not, whether they honour or obey him or not... all will be forgiven, and that is the unconditional love of God. Such fearmongering of condemnation and punishment comes from certain 'teachings' of certian 'churches' or religious movements, and can be said to come from the teachings of the devil, not God.

Sorry, but where have you got this unsubstantiated 'information' from?
If God is in everyone (as many teach) then God is not alone. If God exists in everything, then God has never been alone.
You appear to be imparting your own social ideas onto the concept of God and make vast assumptions because of that. For example, you are assuming that a lack of love occurs due to someone/God being alone, yet how do you know that God was not completely full of love (or that God is just Love) in his own presence.

The whole question seems completely flawed and based on your own assumptions and preconceptions from your own understanding of human social behaviour.

Even as someone who does not believe in God per se, I can understand the teachings and concepts put forward by the Bible and other scriptures, and it seems to me that you are just reading things into those teachings that are not really there.

All Love and Reiki Hugs

Many doors you open. Let' see if we can close them one at a time.

Seems neither of us believe in the genocidal son murderer of the bilbe so it may be easier.

"True Love does not require a reciprocity, it is given without conditions or expectations."

When you give love, for it to reach the other, it must be accepted must it not?
They must know about your offer first and recognize it as such. Right?

When you met your spouse, I am assuming here, she accepted your offer.
If she had not, then you would have found another to give that love to would you not?

If not, or would you continue to pine for her while giving love to another?

Regards
DL

Reply
Crowan
Posts: 3429
(@crowan)
Famed Member
Joined: 15 years ago

When you met your spouse, I am assuming here, she accepted your offer.
If she had not, then you would have found another to give that love to would you not?

These are huge assumptions to make about someone that you do not know:

  • that they have a 'spouse'
  • that said 'spouse' is female
Reply
Posts: 19
Topic starter
(@greatest-i-am)
Active Member
Joined: 12 years ago

These are huge assumptions to make about someone that you do not know:

  • that they have a 'spouse'
  • that said 'spouse' is female

I indicated it was an assumption and if I am off the mark, I will be corrected.

The question can still be answered. It just becomes an imaginary scenario.

I bet you could have even replied but decided on what I see as a cheap shot instead.

Regards
DL

Reply
Energylz
Posts: 16602
(@energylz)
Member
Joined: 21 years ago

Many doors you open. Let' see if we can close them one at a time.

Seems neither of us believe in the genocidal son murderer of the bilbe so it may be easier.



If you do not believe, then how can you label something you don't believe in to be a "genocidal son murderer"?

Aside from that, I would ask that you respect the fact that there are people of many beliefs and backgrounds on this forum, and the forum guidelines are that we should respect those beliefs and discuss things in a friendly manner. Your words can very easily be taken as offensive by those who do choose to believe.



"True Love does not require a reciprocity, it is given without conditions or expectations."

When you give love, for it to reach the other, it must be accepted must it not?



No. To give love and to require a recognition of acceptance for it, is to place conditions on it... and that is conditional love. True love is given without conditions.


They must know about your offer first and recognize it as such. Right?


Wrong. If I only give love on the condition that the person recognizes it, then I am restricting based on conditions, but true love has no such restrictions. Whether the 'other' recognizes unconditional love or not is up to them, but that should not be a presupposition of the person giving.



When you met your spouse, I am assuming here, she accepted your offer.


I'm not sure what 'offer' you mean? I guess you could say I offered myself... flaws and all, but there was no expectation of acceptance, and thinking back there was never any formal acceptance on her part... I guess it was some unspoken/written connection and we've been together ever since.


If she had not, then you would have found another to give that love to would you not?


You seem to be of the opinion that love can only be given selectively. Again, you are referring to conditional love.... that sort of "I'll only love you if you love me back" kind of love. True Love exists between everything, though often it is masked by opinions, judgements and dualistic views.
If we were not still together, does that mean I could not have unconditional love for her? If you believe so, then perhaps you need to rethink.



If not, or would you continue to pine for her while giving love to another?


Pining for people... an interesting concept rooted in attachment. Not for me thanks, such attachments are not necessary, just as restricting love upon conditions is not necessary.

All Love and Reiki Hugs

Reply
Crowan
Posts: 3429
(@crowan)
Famed Member
Joined: 15 years ago

I indicated it was an assumption and if I am off the mark, I will be corrected.

The question can still be answered. It just becomes an imaginary scenario.

I bet you could have even replied but decided on what I see as a cheap shot instead.

Regards
DL

You may see it however you like. However, in assumptions lie prejudices.

Reply
Posts: 19
Topic starter
(@greatest-i-am)
Active Member
Joined: 12 years ago

If you do not believe, then how can you label something you don't believe in to be a "genocidal son murderer"?

That is how he is depicted in scriptures.

I could also say that the giant in Jack and the Beanstalk is a thief.

Aside from that, I would ask that you respect the fact that there are people of many beliefs and backgrounds on this forum, and the forum guidelines are that we should respect those beliefs and discuss things in a friendly manner. Your words can very easily be taken as offensive by those who do choose to believe.

It would be quite hard to respect someone who preaches that the holocaust did not happen or advocates the creation of a rape club. I expect the mods to do their job. So should you and do not try to do their job with me.

No literalist Christian denies that God used genocide nor that he had his son murdered. They do not necessarily use that language but the facts are clear that that is what that God is and that is demonstrable with scripture.

No. To give love and to require a recognition of acceptance for it, is to place conditions on it... and that is conditional love. True love is given without conditions.



So you are saying that I can love Shania Twain and even if she does not know me or return my love, it is true love.

If that is the case, what is the difference in the love that my wife and I share?
She has recognized it and returned it.

From what you say, both loves are the same. Right?

If not, which is true love and which is not?

Wrong. If I only give love on the condition that the person recognizes it, then I am restricting based on conditions, but true love has no such restrictions. Whether the 'other' recognizes unconditional love or not is up to them, but that should not be a presupposition of the person giving.

See above.

I'm not sure what 'offer' you mean? I guess you could say I offered myself... flaws and all, but there was no expectation of acceptance, and thinking back there was never any formal acceptance on her part... I guess it was some unspoken/written connection and we've been together ever since.



Formal or not, you and your love were accepted. My point exactly.

If she had not accepted you, you would be without her and still pining for her if what you say about love being true if not returned.

You seem to be of the opinion that love can only be given selectively.



Yes. If your wife started beating you and raping young boys once a week, would you still love her?

I love my wife but she would be out in about a week.

How long would you suffer yours if she did as indicated?


Again, you are referring to conditional love.... that sort of "I'll only love you if you love me back" kind of love. True Love exists between everything, though often it is masked by opinions, judgements and dualistic views.



Wow. You would love a guy who raped your daughter?
Please do not tell her. That would be cruel.

If we were not still together, does that mean I could not have unconditional love for her? If you believe so, then perhaps you need to rethink.



That would depend on if love needs works and deeds to be true love.

If you remarried, would you love the old wife the same way as the new one?
If you retain the love for both and the old one decided she wanted to return, what would you do?

Pining for people... an interesting concept rooted in attachment. Not for me thanks, such attachments are not necessary, just as restricting love upon conditions is not necessary.

All Love and Reiki Hugs

You indicate that your love is unconditional for all.

Do you love men as much as women.? Are you by?

Regards
DL

Reply
Posts: 19
Topic starter
(@greatest-i-am)
Active Member
Joined: 12 years ago

You may see it however you like. However, in assumptions lie prejudices.

Yes prejudicial and in fact discriminatory. Sometime negatively and sometime positively.

In this case, positive discrimination toward one who I assumed was of my ilk.

Regards
DL

Reply
Posts: 227
 PJ7
(@pj7)
Estimable Member
Joined: 12 years ago

The man whispered, "God, speak to me"
and a meadowlark sang.

But, the man did not hear.

So the man yelled, "God, speak to me"
and the thunder rolled across the sky.

But, the man did not listen.

The man looked around and said,
"God let me see you.."
And a star shone brightly.

But the man did not see.

And, the man shouted,
"God show me a miracle.."
And, a life was born.

But, the man did not notice.

So, the man cried out in despair,
"Touch me God, and let me know you are here."
Whereupon, God reached down and touched the man.
But, the man brushed the butterfly away .

and walked on..

Beautiful!

Reply
Posts: 227
 PJ7
(@pj7)
Estimable Member
Joined: 12 years ago

The man whispered, "God, speak to me"
and a meadowlark sang.

But, the man did not hear.

So the man yelled, "God, speak to me"
and the thunder rolled across the sky.

But, the man did not listen.

The man looked around and said,
"God let me see you.."
And a star shone brightly.

But the man did not see.

And, the man shouted,
"God show me a miracle.."
And, a life was born.

But, the man did not notice.

So, the man cried out in despair,
"Touch me God, and let me know you are here."
Whereupon, God reached down and touched the man.
But, the man brushed the butterfly away .

and walked on..

Two are searching for God

Two young men were on the search for God. They went to a wise man and asked him to show them the right way. The wise man was silent for a long time before he said: “I cannot show you the way. Only you yourself can find what you are looking for.” So they gathered themselves up and set off into the world.

One of them thought that he would only find something so elevated and sublime, if he made a mighty effort and exerted himself. He entered upon a path of knowledge and wandered from town to town, from scholar to scholar. He studied, read, compared and checked everything that had ever been written about God, and over the years he became a scholar himself. Many came from far away and searched him out because it was said that there was hardly another one who knew more about Him and who could speak more cleverly about Him than he could. In the end he surrounded himself only with the cleverest and most erudite scholars of his time and found his fulfillment in day and night-long discussions and studies. The existence of the others seemed to him empty and hollow and senseless and at times something akin to pity overcame him with their ignorance. He felt himself to be so very close to God.

The other young man however did not get far on his path, because he met a young girl who so touched his heart, that he made her his wife. Over the years the two of them were presented with a number of happy and healthy children and the man had his hands full to fill the hungry mouths and provide them with a roof over their heads. But as happy as he undoubtedly was, sometimes a sadness came over him when he thought about the fact that he was once on the search for Most High. He then always felt within him a boundless longing, which always accompanied him in everything he did. He often thought about how his friend might be faring and when news of his great knowledge and erudition reached him, envy and sadness arose within him. He felt himself very far from God.

And so the years passed. The two young men had become elderly, and they both knew that their end was nigh.

The one who had walked the path of knowledge, felt himself weak and tired. The volume of studying had left its mark on him: He had gone blind. While he got his servants to read to him, the writings bored him in the meantime. He knew them all by heart. Many also still sought his company in order to debate with him and to ask his advice. But these too bored him.

They always put the same questions. What plagued him above all was that he could not sleep at night and hardly managed to find rest during the day. Now that death was standing on his threshold, a gruesome certainty took hold of him, which he could not share with any human soul: He, of whom it had been said that there was no one who knew more about Him, now had to face a dreadful truth in his long nights:

All his knowledge had not led him anywhere. Because the very one, the only great question which had determined his entire life, he could not answer. He did not know where God was, and he also did not know which road would lead to Him. All he could recognize was the limited finite nature of his knowledge, which over the years he had made his own. He had wanted to find God with the intellect, and that road had petered out into nothing. Because in him all was empty and hollow. He could not perceive anything, and when he died he was mightily afraid.

The other one too had become an old man. For a long time already he had not been able to work the way he was used to, and he felt himself a little superfluous and very helpless, now that his children were caring for him. In spite of that he made himself useful, as much as he was able to, and it filled him with joy to supervise his grandchildren and to watch while they played. To look after the animals and now and then pull a weed in the garden and see to things. He had a lot of time now and often he sat for hours on the bench in front of the house in the sunshine and just followed his thoughts.

Above all he thought about God, Whom he longed after more and more. He tried time and again to find Him, to recognise Him and to describe Him, but he already failed in the attempt, because he felt he was too big, far too big that he would have let himself be pressed into tired human words or pictures.

That was when the old man sighed and from his heart arose the most ardent wish to find Him Whom he could not grasp. One day when he was again sitting on his bench and watched the children at play, it happened that in the middle of their game the youngest lifted her little head and smiled at him with radiant eyes. In that moment a bird began to sing, the wind rustled through the trees and a butterfly danced before his eyes.

That was when the old man suddenly felt his heart warming and something in his innermost erupted. Slowly he arose and looked laughingly into the heaven above, and silently he formed the words: “I thank you my Lord, that I was permitted to find you at last….” And when the hour came for him to die, a smile was on his lips…..

Peace and Light
Peter

Reply
Posts: 527
(@scommstech)
Honorable Member
Joined: 16 years ago

Does God get a fail in the love category?

Do you believe that God loves us?

Why or why not?

Is God even able to love?

Regards
DL

Is it possible that we have the wrong understanding of love, and try to relate love to how we materially need it..

Reply
Posts: 227
 PJ7
(@pj7)
Estimable Member
Joined: 12 years ago

Is it possible that we have the wrong understanding of love, and try to relate love to how we materially need it..

God is Love beyond our human comprehension!

Peace and Light
Peter

Reply
Posts: 527
(@scommstech)
Honorable Member
Joined: 16 years ago

God is Love beyond our human comprehension!

Peace and Light
Peter

That seems to be the standard response, and it seems to be describing God, not love. But why link God to love, just because he may have created it.. We can say that God is truth, but that does not mean that truth can only be applied to God, or defies a rational explanation.

I do think that love itself needs to be better understood before any lack of it can be inferred.

Reply
Posts: 227
 PJ7
(@pj7)
Estimable Member
Joined: 12 years ago

That seems to be the standard response, and it seems to be describing God, not love. But why link God to love, just because he may have created it.. We can say that God is truth, but that does not mean that truth can only be applied to God, or defies a rational explanation.

I do think that love itself needs to be better understood before any lack of it can be inferred.

Hi
Perhaps the standard response is because it is closer to the truth and recognised by so many as true it's; describing God, not love you say, I personally I do not think you can separate the two, God is love, God is also Truth,

If you are expecting someone to separate them so you can understand it with your intellect, which is born of the soil that we eat which our food comes from, and not with your intuition which comes from the spirit of man.

It is like trying to separate water from water!

When you say Truth I refer to the link to my site” What is Truth”which explains what Truth is!

[url]In the Light of Truth - The TRUTH[/url]

Peace and Light
Peter

Reply
Posts: 527
(@scommstech)
Honorable Member
Joined: 16 years ago

Hi
Perhaps the standard response is because it is closer to the truth and recognised by so many as true it's; describing God, not love you say, I personally I do not think you can separate the two, God is love, God is also Truth,

If you are expecting someone to separate them so you can understand it with your intellect, which is born of the soil that we eat which our food comes from, and not with your intuition which comes from the spirit of man.

It is like trying to separate water from water!

When you say Truth I refer to the link to my site” What is Truth”which explains what Truth is!

[url]In the Light of Truth - The TRUTH[/url]

Peace and Light
Peter

Not too sure how the example of separating water fits into all this, but if we think of maths.

A teacher gave us the initial knowledge of maths, Just as God gave us the initial power to love, but just as we can use the maths whenever and wherever we are, the same can also be said of love.

Many people think of love as a noun or in a descriptive sense. I believe that it is really a doing word, just as the maths is only useful when it is done .

Consequently it is important to know how love works, so that when it appears not to work, we can understand where the problem really lies and apply a correction.

I find that the statement.... God is love... can be meaningless unless we know exactly what love is.

Reply
Posts: 227
 PJ7
(@pj7)
Estimable Member
Joined: 12 years ago

Not too sure how the example of separating water fits into all this, but if we think of maths.

A teacher gave us the initial knowledge of maths, Just as God gave us the initial power to love, but just as we can use the maths whenever and wherever we are, the same can also be said of love.

Many people think of love as a noun or in a descriptive sense. I believe that it is really a doing word, just as the maths is only useful when it is done .

Consequently it is important to know how love works, so that when it appears not to work, we can understand where the problem really lies and apply a correction.

I find that the statement.... God is love... can be meaningless unless we know exactly what love is.

Hi

I must admit I didn't put it as i intended, I meant to say if you have two separate glasses of water, and you put them both into one glass this is how I would try to explain God and the love of God, to separate the original glass of water from the other glass is an impossibility, they now become one this is how I see God and the love of God as inseparable.

I do not think that love can be described and only felt, by the person who draws on it, as I have said I believe love is God, God is Love and Truth.

It is not something I believe that can be explained that the intellect can understand it, is like pain, how do you explain to someone what pains you are feeling in comparison to theirs, I believe we all see and feel differently, this I believe includes with love.

Peace and light
Peter

Reply
Posts: 527
(@scommstech)
Honorable Member
Joined: 16 years ago

Hi

I must admit I didn't put it as i intended, I meant to say if you have two separate glasses of water, and you put them both into one glass this is how I would try to explain God and the love of God, to separate the original glass of water from the other glass is an impossibility, they now become one this is how I see God and the love of God as inseparable.

I do not think that love can be described and only felt, by the person who draws on it, as I have said I believe love is God, God is Love and Truth.

It is not something I believe that can be explained that the intellect can understand it, is like pain, how do you explain to someone what pains you are feeling in comparison to theirs, I believe we all see and feel differently, this I believe includes with love.

Peace and light
Peter

Hi Peter
We probably can't compare the levels love or pain but to me there is no reason why they can't be explained.

The lowest organic form of life is thought to be a string. The strings have been calculated as having resonance. Extending this, it is logical to suppose that individual organic parts have their own unique resonance as their identities. If we disrupt these resonance by disease or accident their vibration will change. This I strongly suspect is what the brain interprets and tells us with another resonance, called pain. We may not as yet know how to accurately calculate pain thresholds, but some disruption has to have happened, for it to be recognised as an effect.
To me it is the same with love. It has an effect and that effect can be analysed. I quite agree that it originated from God, and it may well be that it is solely confined to God. In that case, and to my reasoning it has to make us a part of God because love is a part of us also..

Many actually see us this way, and the mortal experience is really just an illusion and what we really are, are total extensions or reflections of God's ideas albeit being displayed as a material expression. That to me would explain why love can be effective between individuals, it also gives me an idea of why it was created in the first place..

Reply
Energylz
Posts: 16602
(@energylz)
Member
Joined: 21 years ago

Originally Posted by Energylz [url][/url]

If you do not believe, then how can you label something you don't believe in to be a "genocidal son murderer"?

That is how he is depicted in scriptures.

I could also say that the giant in Jack and the Beanstalk is a thief.



I don't believe there is anywhere in the scriptures that God is described as a "genocidal son murderer". This is just your own perception.


Aside from that, I would ask that you respect the fact that there are people of many beliefs and backgrounds on this forum, and the forum guidelines are that we should respect those beliefs and discuss things in a friendly manner. Your words can very easily be taken as offensive by those who do choose to believe.

It would be quite hard to respect someone who preaches that the holocaust did not happen or advocates the creation of a rape club.


We do not have any members on this forum preaching or advocating such. This forum is not created for such topics.


I expect the mods to do their job. So should you and do not try to do their job with me.


I am a mod and therefore have the right to ask you to respect other members beliefs in line with the guidelines.

No literalist Christian denies that God used genocide nor that he had his son murdered. They do not necessarily use that language but the facts are clear that that is what that God is and that is demonstrable with scripture.

You cannot say that "that is what God is" when you do not believe in God. To those who do not believe in God, he is just a conceptual figurehead for religious beliefs. Next you'll be telling me that he is clearly a miracle worker as the scriptures also depict such stories.


No. To give love and to require a recognition of acceptance for it, is to place conditions on it... and that is conditional love. True love is given without conditions.
So you are saying that I can love Shania Twain and even if she does not know me or return my love, it is true love.

If that is the case, what is the difference in the love that my wife and I share?
She has recognized it and returned it.

From what you say, both loves are the same. Right?

If not, which is true love and which is not?


By the sounds of it, the love you have for both seems conditional.
Are you saying you would not have love for the person who is your wife if she did not return love to you? Are you happy to place such conditions on your love? If, for example, your wife was in an accident and lost her memory of who you were, or was in a coma or suchlike, would you cease to love your wife because she cannot return love to you?
As for Shania Twain, why would you choose not to have love for her? or for any other person for that matter.
In spiritual terms, true Love exists between all. This seems to be a concept you are not familiar with, or that you find unconfortable?




I'm not sure what 'offer' you mean? I guess you could say I offered myself... flaws and all, but there was no expectation of acceptance, and thinking back there was never any formal acceptance on her part... I guess it was some unspoken/written connection and we've been together ever since.

Formal or not, you and your love were accepted. My point exactly.


How do you know? Acceptance suggests conditions. True love is beyond conditions and beyond acceptance.


If she had not accepted you, you would be without her and still pining for her if what you say about love being true if not returned.


You presume to know me when you clearly do not. "pining" is attachment, and attachments come when we place restrictions and conditions on things e.g. "I can only love you if you are with me". There is no need for pining if true love exists between us.


You seem to be of the opinion that love can only be given selectively.

Yes. If your wife started beating you and raping young boys once a week, would you still love her?

I love my wife but she would be out in about a week.

How long would you suffer yours if she did as indicated?


I could not be removed from the true love between us (because true love cannot be removed) and I would seek to help her to prevent her from even doing those things.
I see you're love is clearly conditional, as you choose to abandon your wife who clearly needs help if she were to undertake such misguided actions.


Again, you are referring to conditional love.... that sort of "I'll only love you if you love me back" kind of love. True Love exists between everything, though often it is masked by opinions, judgements and dualistic views.
Wow. You would love a guy who raped your daughter?
Please do not tell her. That would be cruel.


Your vivid examples only go to show that you do not know what true love is, and it is true love that is referred to by those who talk of God as being Love. Instead, you are projecting your own idea of Love which is really conditional love and using that to try and discredit the concept of God. Whilst I don't believe in God myself, you're words are clearly showing your misunderstanding of the teachings and what is meant by "God is Love".


If we were not still together, does that mean I could not have unconditional love for her? If you believe so, then perhaps you need to rethink.

That would depend on if love needs works and deeds to be true love.

If you remarried, would you love the old wife the same way as the new one?
If you retain the love for both and the old one decided she wanted to return, what would you do?


Conditional love again is what you are referring to.


You indicate that your love is unconditional for all.

Do you love men as much as women.? Are you by?



I think you meant to ask if I am "Bi" as in bisexual, but what has that got to do with true or unconditional love? I guess you obviously intend such remarks to try and inflame the discussion, by trying to make things personal. Such remarks are not suitable or within the forum guidelines. ()


Guidelines:
When posting a new topic, please select the forum that best relates to the subject matter of your topic. Redundant topics are not allowed and are considered spam. Our members represent a wide variety of religious and spiritual people. When joining in discussions on our forums, expect to come across persons whose ideas, opinions and beliefs may be different from yours. Please approach such encounters with tolerance and an acceptance of others' faiths and beliefs.

Language:
Any foul or hostile language used will not be tolerated. This includes any derogatory statements and profanity. Direct or indirect personal attacks are strictly not permitted. Insults and negative attitudes are not allowed. Saying you don't agree and why, can be done in a good humoured and polite way without causing offence.

All members have the right to their own ideas, beliefs and faiths. Members have the right to express these with equal respect and consideration.



This only indicates your idea of love is based upon sexual relationships and that you fail to see the difference between conditional and unconditional love.

So let me ask you... do you not have any love for your father?

All Love and Reiki Hugs

Reply
Crowan
Posts: 3429
(@crowan)
Famed Member
Joined: 15 years ago

The lowest organic form of life is thought to be a string.

In what sense?

Reply
Crowan
Posts: 3429
(@crowan)
Famed Member
Joined: 15 years ago

Looked at shamanically, if enough power is put into an idea of a deity then this will construct a ‘thought-form’ which will be imbued with a spirit. (I think of it as a ‘job description’ which a spirit then fills.)

That being so, it is entirely possible that both the “genocidal son murderer” and the “god is love” exist.

Which means that it would be possible – although possibly not advisable – to visit both in a shamanic trance journey.
(Not that I would. I’m quite happy dealing with the deities that I do visit.)

Reply
Posts: 227
 PJ7
(@pj7)
Estimable Member
Joined: 12 years ago

Hi Peter
We probably can't compare the levels love or pain but to me there is no reason why they can't be explained.

The lowest organic form of life is thought to be a string. The strings have been calculated as having resonance. Extending this, it is logical to suppose that individual organic parts have their own unique resonance as their identities. If we disrupt these resonance by disease or accident their vibration will change. This I strongly suspect is what the brain interprets and tells us with another resonance, called pain. We may not as yet know how to accurately calculate pain thresholds, but some disruption has to have happened, for it to be recognised as an effect.
To me it is the same with love. It has an effect and that effect can be analysed. I quite agree that it originated from God, and it may well be that it is solely confined to God. In that case, and to my reasoning it has to make us a part of God because love is a part of us also..

Many actually see us this way, and the mortal experience is really just an illusion and what we really are, are total extensions or reflections of God's ideas albeit being displayed as a material expression. That to me would explain why love can be effective between individuals, it also gives me an idea of why it was created in the first place..

Hi

I believe everything in creation is formed by radiation, by the Creator, for me to explain this is very difficult, as I have taken many years of study to come to the understanding that I have at the moment.

Love I also believe travels on the ray purity.

A person

“will feel distinctly that it is only a longing and a desire to harbour something Divine within him, but not a certainty!
It is quite right to say that man carries within him a spark of God but this spark of God is spirit! it is not a part of Divinity

The term spark is a perfectly correct designation. A spark develops and flies out without taking along or bearing within it anything of the quality of the producer. It is the same here a spark of God is not itself Divine.”

The artist paints a picture and you can recognise the artist from the picture, but the artist is not in the picture he is probably a long way away, yet you have the picture before you,as is with The Creator.

Peace and Light
Peter

Reply
Posts: 19
Topic starter
(@greatest-i-am)
Active Member
Joined: 12 years ago

Is it possible that we have the wrong understanding of love, and try to relate love to how we materially need it..

It is more likely that God would have the wrong one as his is whatever the collective has put in his mouth. The real understanding of love is in your heart. Give it whatever words you feel are worthy.

Man is here to define terms and definitions. Absentee God are just superfluous garbage to that end.

Especially when waiting or giving any veracity to what a genocidal son murderer like the O T God would have to contribute.

Regards
DL

Reply
Posts: 19
Topic starter
(@greatest-i-am)
Active Member
Joined: 12 years ago

God is Love beyond our human comprehension!

Peace and Light
Peter

God is a prick beyond our human comprehension. Care to debate?

It was God's plan from the beginning to have Adam and Eve eat the forbidden fruit. This can be demonstrated by the fact that the bible says that Jesus "was crucified from the foundations of the Earth," that is to say, God planned to crucify Jesus as atonement for sin before he even created human beings or God damned sin.

1Peter 1:20 0 He was chosen before the creation of the world, but was revealed in these last times for your sake.

This indicates that Jesus had no choice.

If God had not intended humans to sin from the beginning, why did he build into the Creation this "solution" for sin? Why create a solution for a problem you do not anticipate?

God knew that the moment he said "don't eat from that tree," the die was cast. The eating was inevitable. Eve was merely following the plan.

This then begs the question.

What kind of God would plan and execute the murder of his own son when there was absolutely no need to?

Only an insane God. That’s who.

The cornerstone of Christianity is human sacrifice, thus showing it‘s immorality.

One of Christianity's highest form of immorality is what they have done to women.
They have denied them equality and subjugated them to men.







Regards
DL

Reply
Posts: 19
Topic starter
(@greatest-i-am)
Active Member
Joined: 12 years ago

Hi

I must admit I didn't put it as i intended, I meant to say if you have two separate glasses of water, and you put them both into one glass this is how I would try to explain God and the love of God, to separate the original glass of water from the other glass is an impossibility, they now become one this is how I see God and the love of God as inseparable.

I do not think that love can be described and only felt, by the person who draws on it, as I have said I believe love is God, God is Love and Truth.

It is not something I believe that can be explained that the intellect can understand it, is like pain, how do you explain to someone what pains you are feeling in comparison to theirs, I believe we all see and feel differently, this I believe includes with love.

Peace and light
Peter

Now, therefore, behold, the Lord hath put a lying spirit in the mouth of these thy prophets, and the Lord hath spoken evil concerning thee.
1Kings 22:23

Now therefore, behold, the Lord hath put a lying spirit in the mouth of these thy prophets.
2 Chron 18:22

Ah, Lord GOD! surely thou hast greatly deceived this people.

Jer 4:10

O Lord, thou hast deceived me, and I was deceived. Jer 20:7

And if a prophet be deceived when he hath spoken a thing, I the Lord have deceived that prophet.
Ezekiel 14:9

For this cause God shall send them strong delusion, that they should believe a lie.
Thessalonians 2:11


To me, God’s worse lie was to Adam and Eve. He told them they could eat of the tree of life and then reneged and in a real sense murdered them by denying them a remedy.

Does Love and Truth lie?

God admits in scriptures that Satan moved him to harm without just cause.

Does Love and Truth cause harm without just cause?

Regards
DL

Reply
Page 1 / 2
Share: