Does God love me?

  • Thread starter Thread starter JamesATyler
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
The_DNA_Rose said:
There is a chemical, that can influence every one of those feelings or reactions. When a man reaches such an age, that his testosterone level falls, that he can see past how testosterone governs his feeling, then you will comprehend more. Until then, you are the chemical that loves, and seeks to emulate emotions by words.

All of your chemicals, are produced by the DNA code, of the creator…Who works in life, like bleach works on denim.
Click to expand...
Should I ever choose to die for you (or for anyone else for that matter) it will not be because of feelings/emotions; it will be because of my will to sacrifice for you and them for the love of God. As I said before, true love is NOT merely a feeling but is in the will. To suffer and commit oneself for the greatest good of another is what it means to truly love another person; mere warm and fuzzy feelings for another person are only feelings which by themselves do not necessarily reflect real love. God bless you.
 
Neoplatonist said:
We do not start loving someone by an act of will, for instance.
Click to expand...
Says you, not orthodox Catholic theologians; they say that true love is in the will. Real Christian love (charity) is found in choosing (willing) to suffer and to commit oneself for the greatest good of another … it is not found merely in a feeling of love. God bless you.
 
ready said:
Says you, not orthodox Catholic theologians; they say that true love is in the will. Real Christian love (charity) is found in choosing (willing) to suffer and to commit oneself for the greatest good of another … it is not found merely in a feeling of love. God bless you.
Click to expand...
That makes sense with regard to much of carrying on or carrying out love. Are you suggesting that there is not some spontaneous reaction within the heart, so to speak? I see the suffering child and I then reflect on whether I should love and then must will it?

In the case of the parent and child or the bride and bridegroom, the analogies given us by Christ himself, the idea of starting to love our child or our spouse by an act of “will” seems to stand in stark contrast to experience.
 
Neoplatonist said:
We need to distinguish between giving love and receiving love, and we need to distinguish between the cause of loving someone and the effect of loving someone. We do not start loving someone by an act of will, for instance.
Click to expand...
In the first place, how does one give what one has not received?
If you did not create anything about yourself, your ability to love has been given to you. There is an ultimate source for this, which a Christian would call God, but to be sure our ability to love is nurtured and imaged by those around us…parents, friends, spouses etc…

Do you believe you were given the freedom to choose and act, of your own free will? If you do, then the cooperation of your will is the first movement of love.
“I have been given this gift, I will to pass it on.”
If others dominate our will, or crush it, or pervert it, by not expressing this love well, then we may not have “good will”. In that case, our feelings and senses and urges lead us to do things that are not love.
I suppose our call as Christians is to model this love in such a way that all people are called to integrate their feelings and urges with “good will”, which is the mover of love.
 
Neoplatonist said:
That makes sense with regard to much of carrying on or carrying out love. Are you suggesting that there is not some spontaneous reaction within the heart, so to speak? I see the suffering child and I then reflect on whether I should love and then must will it?

In the case of the parent and child or the bride and bridegroom, the analogies given us by Christ himself, the idea of starting to love our child or our spouse by an act of “will” seems to stand in stark contrast to experience.
Click to expand...
But I did not mean or say that true love requires reflection; it doesn’t. It only involves the willing of the greatest good for another. For example, if I really loved some child and were to see him in great suffering, I would automatically seek to help him or I’d make the decision to help him – I’d pray for him or would do some other charitable deed for him. If I did not truly love this child, I’d feel bad for him, but would only feel bad for him and wouldn’t do a single thing to help him. Love is in the will and proves itself by actions. God bless you.
 
clem456 said:
In the first place, how does one give what one has not received?
If you did not create anything about yourself, your ability to love has been given to you. There is an ultimate source for this, which a Christian would call God, but to be sure our ability to love is nurtured and imaged by those around us…parents, friends, spouses etc…

Do you believe you were given the freedom to choose and act, of your own free will? If you do, then the cooperation of your will is the first movement of love.
“I have been given this gift, I will to pass it on.”
If others dominate our will, or crush it, or pervert it, by not expressing this love well, then we may not have “good will”. In that case, our feelings and senses and urges lead us to do things that are not love.
I suppose our call as Christians is to model this love in such a way that all people are called to integrate their feelings and urges with “good will”, which is the mover of love.
Click to expand...
The model begs the question. Does an electric eel’s ability to shock and stun its prey mean it must have first been shocked and stunned?
 
ready said:
But I did not mean or say that true love requires reflection; it doesn’t. It only involves the willing of the greatest good for another. For example, if I really loved some child and were to see him in great suffering, I would automatically seek to help him or I’d make the decision to help him – I’d pray for him or would do some other charitable deed for him. If I did not truly love this child, I’d feel bad for him, but would only feel bad for him and wouldn’t do a single thing to help him. Love is in the will and proves itself by actions. God bless you.
Click to expand...
Automatic…so willing something is NOT an act of choice?
 
Neoplatonist said:
Automatic…so willing something is NOT an act of choice?
Click to expand...
Not to speak for the poster, but for him, the movement of his will is informed by his conscience and the practice of virtue. The will becomes habituated (automatic) to right action. To habitually act for the good does not negate free will.
 
Neoplatonist said:
Automatic…so willing something is NOT an act of choice?
Click to expand...
Remember that love is to will the greatest good for another, and God in heaven is the greatest good that exists. An act of love does not have to be automatic for it to be true love; an act of love could be either automatic or a decision (to love). Loving can be automatic or a decision/choice, but in either case one has it within the superior part of his soul at some point to love the other person, that is, to will the greatest good for him/her. If in the superior part of one’s soul one does not will to love the other person, one would not have any automatic response to love him/her (to will the greatest good for him/her)… one wouldn’t love him/her until a choice is made to love the person (to will the highest good for him/her – heaven). God bless you.
 
clem456 said:
Not to speak for the poster, but for him, the movement of his will is informed by his conscience and the practice of virtue. The will becomes habituated (automatic) to right action. To habitually act for the good does not negate free will.
Click to expand...
Thanks, Clem!👍🙂
 
clem456 said:
The eel has the gift to do such, that it might eat and survive. 🤷
Click to expand...
I’m just working from the theory that for A to be capable of x means it must have had x done to it. Our experience is riddled with examples that escape this claim.
 
clem456 said:
In the first place, how does one give what one has not received?
If you did not create anything about yourself, your ability to love has been given to you. There is an ultimate source for this, which a Christian would call God, but to be sure our ability to love is nurtured and imaged by those around us…parents, friends, spouses etc…

Do you believe you were given the freedom to choose and act, of your own free will? If you do, then the cooperation of your will is the first movement of love.
“I have been given this gift, I will to pass it on.”
If others dominate our will, or crush it, or pervert it, by not expressing this love well, then we may not have “good will”. In that case, our feelings and senses and urges lead us to do things that are not love.
I suppose our call as Christians is to model this love in such a way that all people are called to integrate their feelings and urges with “good will”, which is the mover of love.
Click to expand...
How would this translate to a feeling or awareness of receiving love?
 
Neoplatonist said:
I’m just working from the theory that for A to be capable of x means it must have had x done to it. Our experience is riddled with examples that escape this claim.
Click to expand...
For the eel to exist, to continue to exist, the drive to eat, survive, propagate itself…it has been given this from something other than itself.
I’m not saying that specifically, the eel was shocked and paralyzed in order to be able to shock and paralyze another creature. You know that.
 
clem456 said:
I honestly am not sure what it is you are asking.
Click to expand...
Just trying to not travel too far down the track of exploring medieval theories of psychology unless I can see how thinking the will is involved or not changes whether someone believes they are loved (in their bones, so to speak, not in some intellectualized, Scholastic way) by a personal God.
 
Dear Neoplatonist,

Each one of us is loved not because any of us feel loved by God/feel His love. We know that we are loved because the Church teaches infallibly that God gives each and every one of us the graces we need to be saved and that He wills that all men be saved, which is the greatest good that He (or anyone else for that matter, if it were possible) could ever bestow on us all. He even died an ignominious death on a cross so that each and every one of us can be saved, which is another proof of His love for each and every one of us. Remember that true love is willing the greatest good for another and is proved by deeds. Clearly, God wills the greatest good for us and even has proved His love for us. He has excluded nobody in His generous act of love. NOBODY can in all fairness argue that they are not loved by God, for His love is not found in a feeling we have about His love for us, but in His will, willing the greatest good for us (our salvation) and proving His love by His deeds (by His death). God bless you.
 
ready said:
Dear Neoplatonist,

Each one of us is loved not because any of us feel loved by God/feel His love. We know that we are loved because the Church teaches infallibly that God gives each and every one of us the graces we need to be saved and that He wills that all men be saved, which is the greatest good that He (or anyone else for that matter, if it were possible) could ever bestow on us all. He even died an ignominious death on a cross so that each and every one of us can be saved, which is another proof of His love for each and every one of us. Remember that true love is willing the greatest good for another and is proved by deeds. Clearly, God wills the greatest good for us and even has proved His love for us. He has excluded nobody in His generous act of love. NOBODY can in all fairness argue that they are not loved by God, for His love is not found in a feeling we have about His love for us, but in His will, willing the greatest good for us (our salvation) and proving His love by His deeds (by His death). God bless you.
Click to expand...
And yet, how can we make sense of why feeling loved would not be part of what He wills for our greatest good. Is not feeling loved a powerful, inspiring experience that helps us grow and, in turn, give more love out to others?

Do we not want those we love to feel loved? How could we love them and *not *want that?
 
Neoplatonist said:
And yet, how can we make sense of why feeling loved would not be part of what He wills for our greatest good. Is not feeling loved a powerful, inspiring experience that helps us grow and, in turn, give more love out to others?
Click to expand...
Many things about God are mysteries. Many things about human emotions and feelings are mysteries.

That God loves us, whether we feel it, or not, is not a mystery.

Is it possible in your case the if you had a powerful, inspiring experience, that it would lead you away from, rather than, toward God?
 
Neoplatonist said:
And yet, how can we make sense of why feeling loved would not be part of what He wills for our greatest good. Is not feeling loved a powerful, inspiring experience that helps us grow and, in turn, give more love out to others?

Do we not want those we love to feel loved? **How could we love them and *not ***want that?/
Click to expand...
Because we want something even greater for them – a life of pure faith, not a rosy life of consolations with no reward other than the consolations themselves; a life of pure faith has the greatest merit/reward associated with it, as it is a proof of our love to God that we love Him not for His gifts – not for His love either – but for Him alone. Such love on our part will be so immensely, so richly rewarded, you know this. God bless you.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top