God's love, wrath, and other "emotions"

[Ora_et_Labora_1]

I was listening to an Eastern Orthodox podcast the other day about God’s wrath, where the priest that was speaking said that while it do not exist within the Godhead, that God does have wrath and such towards created things. He also mentioned that (Roman) Catholics say that God doesn’t, that these manifestations of wrath, etc, are dependant upon people’s subjectivity. I never really thought about this, and I don’t know the Catholic teaching on this. Anyone care to clarify?

 

[EphelDuath]

Due to the infinity of God, it is impossible to speak of him in anything but metaphors. Thus, ideas like “jealousy” and “wrath” in God are comparable to human emotions, but are not the same thing.

Love is not an emotion. To love is to will the good of another.

 

[spockrates]

Interesting topic. Regardless of the emotion or motivation behind the action, is not an action judged on it’s own merits? I mean, condemning someone to Hell cannot rightly be called an act of forgiveness, or an act of love (in any sense of the word) for the one condemned. Can it?

 

[EphelDuath]

Interesting topic. Regardless of the emotion or motivation behind the action, is not an action judged on it’s own merits? I mean, condemning someone to hell cannot rightly be called an act of forgiveness, or an act of love (in any sense of the word) for the one condemned. Can it?

God condemns nobody to hell. They go there because that’s the place left if they show no desire to enter Heaven.

St. Thomas Aquinas on the matter.

 

[spockrates]

God condemns nobody to hell. They go there because that’s the place left if they show no desire to enter Heaven.

St. Thomas Aquinas on the matter.

Thank you, Ephel. I suppose that if everyone in Hell were asked to make a show of hands if they wanted to leave, every hand would be raised!



But let’s say it is true that a person actually would choose hell over some less painful eternal existence. Can it be called an act of love to allow such insanity? Or would you say it is an act of indifference?

 

[EphelDuath]

But let’s say it is true that a person actually would choose hell over some less painful eternal existence. Can it be called an act of love to allow such insanity? Or would you say it is an act of indifference?

Do you think God isn’t omnipotent enough to make a fair judgment about the afterlife of men?

 

[spockrates]

Do you think God isn’t omnipotent enough to make a fair judgment about the afterlife of men?

No, Ephel. Please don’t get me wrong. I’m not saying God is not omnipotent, nor that He is not omnibenevolent. I’m just wondering whether every act of God is an act of love for everyone effected by His actions. While being 100% just, allowing someone to go to Hell is 0% loving for the one allowed to go to Hell. It might be an act of love in protecting you and me from such a one, but it’s not an act of love for the one who is hellbent. Don’t you agree?

 

[EphelDuath]

No, Ephel. Please don’t get me wrong. I’m not saying God is not omnipotent, nor that He is not omnibenevolent. I’m just wondering whether every act of God is an act of love for everyone effected by His actions. While being 100% just, allowing someone to go to Hell is 0% loving for the one allowed to go to Hell. It might be an act of love in protecting you and me from such a one, but it’s not an act of love for the one who is hellbent. Don’t you agree?

If a person goes to hell, it is because he/she was given a perfectly fair opportunity to accept Christ, and chose not to. Throwing a rope to somebody desperately hanging onto a cliff is love; whether or not the person chooses to grab it is his choice.

 

[spockrates]

If a person goes to hell, it is because he/she was given a perfectly fair opportunity to accept Christ, and chose not to. Throwing a rope to somebody desperately hanging onto a cliff is love; whether or not the person chooses to grab it is his choice.

But if hanging on the cliff is a metaphor for one already in hell, then does God give a lifeline to such a one?



It is wise if He does not, and it is just if He does not, but how can it be loving if He does not? Therefore, how can every act of God be an act of love? Isn’t it true that sometimes people (sadly, I should add) give God no choice but to withhold His love?

 

[EphelDuath]

But if hanging on the cliff is a metaphor for one already in hell, then does God give a life line to such a one?

Hanging off a cliff is a metaphor for being on earth. By the grace of God, you can climb to the top and be saved; or, if you are fully aware of God’s mercy but turn it down, you will inevitably fall off the cliffside and die, i.e., find yourself in Hell.

It is wise if He does not, and it is just if He does not, but how can it be loving if He does not? Therefore, how can every act of God be an act of love? Sometimes don’t people (sadly, I should add) give God no choice but to withhold His love?

God loves us, and therefore wills us to be saved. Nevertheless, he also respects our free will and only saves us if we are willing. When one goes to hell, it is not because God did not love him enough, but because he did not love God enough.

 

[spockrates]

Hanging off a cliff is a metaphor for being on earth. By the grace of God, you can climb to the top and be saved; or, if you are fully aware of God’s mercy but turn it down, you will inevitably fall off the cliffside and die, i.e., find yourself in Hell.

Yes, I understand. Let’s say someone falls from the cliff. Such a one is alive, but in great distress. Is it loving to leave Him there?

God loves us, and therefore wills us to be saved. Nevertheless, he also respects our free will and only saves us if we are willing. When one goes to hell, it is not because God did not love him enough, but because he did not love God enough.

Isn’t the truth more likely that few in Hell believed they would end up there? And that some in Hell did not believe there was a Hell or a God? Rather than willful rebellion, it seems deception is more likely the cause of much condemnation. Don’t you think? Or do you think I am deceived?

 

[EphelDuath]

Yes, I understand. Let’s say someone falls from the cliff. Such a one is alive, but in great distress. Is it loving to leave Him there?

It’s respecting his free will, since he’s the only who chose to refuse to take the rope.

Isn’t the truth more likely that few in Hell believed they would end up there? And that some in Hell did not believe there was a Hell or a God? Rather than willful rebellion, it seems deception is more likely the cause of much condemnation. Don’t you think? Or do you think I am deceived?

Again, this presumes that God is making poor judgments upon souls. You must understand that an omnipotent being can do no wrong and has a level of intelligence that’s inconceivable.

 

[Ora_et_Labora_1]

Uhm, I think this thread is being hi-jacked. This is more to the point.

Due to the infinity of God, it is impossible to speak of him in anything but metaphors. Thus, ideas like “jealousy” and “wrath” in God are comparable to human emotions, but are not the same thing.

Yes, I beleive that God has these “emotions” but which cannot be categorized into the same one’s as human, the same way that if we talk about God as existing, it is an existence which is ocmpletely different than ours (and as such is not “existing” in our finite understanding of the word). Still, do Catholics believe that these things do not exist within the God-head yet exist towards creation, as the Eastern Orthodox also believe or was that priest right in saying that we believe that they all depend on people’s subjective experience of God’s love?

 

[Ron_Conte]

The Church teaches that God is unchanging. But emotions involve change; a human person is first angry, and later calm; is sad and later happy, etc. Therefore, God does not have emotions.

CCC: In God “there is no variation or shadow due to change.”

[James]
{1:17} Every excellent gift and every perfect gift is from above, descending from the Father of lights, with whom there is no change, nor any shadow of alteration.

Furthermore, the Divine Nature is truly and absolutely simple. God is not divided into parts, not even into love, mercy, justice, will, knowledge, existence. All that God is and does is One. In God, love is mercy is justice is will is knowledge is His very existence. And all the acts of God are also one with His being. In God, being and doing are one.

God cannot have first one emotion, then another, because He does not change, and also because then He would be divided into parts. Although God is Three Persons, the Three are One Nature, and the One Nature is truly and absolutely simple.

 

[spockrates]

It’s respecting his free will, since he’s the only who chose to refuse to take the rope.

Again, this presumes that God is making poor judgments upon souls. You must understand that an omnipotent being can do no wrong and has a level of intelligence that’s inconceivable.

Sorry for my delay in responding.



I’m not trying to be presumptuous about God (God forbid)! Just trying to understand whether every act of God is an act of love. My thought is that judgment is not an act of love for the one judged, though it is likely an act of love for the ones protected from the one judged. I suppose our free will forces God to choose loving some and not loving others. What is your thought, Ephel?

 

[spockrates]

The Church teaches that God is unchanging. But emotions involve change; a human person is first angry, and later calm; is sad and later happy, etc. Therefore, God does not have emotions.

CCC: In God “there is no variation or shadow due to change.”

[James]
{1:17} Every excellent gift and every perfect gift is from above, descending from the Father of lights, with whom there is no change, nor any shadow of alteration.

Furthermore, the Divine Nature is truly and absolutely simple. God is not divided into parts, not even into love, mercy, justice, will, knowledge, existence. All that God is and does is One. In God, love is mercy is justice is will is knowledge is His very existence. And all the acts of God are also one with His being. In God, being and doing are one.

God cannot have first one emotion, then another, because He does not change, and also because then He would be divided into parts. Although God is Three Persons, the Three are One Nature, and the One Nature is truly and absolutely simple.

RC:

The idea that God is emotionless appeals to the Spock side of me, but the Socrates side of me wonders whether what you say is true. Are you saying God does not experience emotions such as sadness?

 

[Ora_et_Labora_1]

In Himself, i.e. within the Trinity, I would probably say no. Yet in the Incarnation He, as the man Jesus, experienced the whole gamut of human emotions. Remember, what was not assumed was not redeemed.

 

[AlbertBall]

Sorry for my delay in responding.



I’m not trying to be presumptuous about God (God forbid)! Just trying to understand whether every act of God is an act of love. My thought is that judgment is not an act of love for the one judged, though it is likely an act of love for the ones protected from the one judged. I suppose our free will forces God to choose loving some and not loving others. What is your thought, Ephel?

You raise some very valid points. It seems unloving to me. One has to remember that the proposition is that god sets up all the rules. Therefore it is by his choice that anyone who does not get in to heaven is punished for eternity. There are many things wrong with this situation.

For example it would be far more reasonable to give good people who have no interest in entering heaven the choice to reject heaven but not be sent to hell. Also an infinite punishment for no, or a finite crime, is utterly immoral. It seems more like a system set up for blackmail than anything else… Love me OR ELSE!

 

[spockrates]

In Himself, i.e. within the Trinity, I would probably say no. Yet in the Incarnation He, as the man Jesus, experienced the whole gamut of human emotions. Remember, what was not assumed was not redeemed.

Does God, in Himself (in the Trinity) love?

 

[Ora_et_Labora_1]

Does God, in Himself (in the Trinity) love?

Oops, my bad. I meant to say that emotions such as wrath, etc, excepting love, probably have no existence within the Godhead.