Problem with "God is Love"

[goout]

Yes. Draws a distinction between Christianity and just about any other faith.

In Christianity we have an intimacy of love in the Incarnation of Christ. God so pours himself out to the degree that God becomes one with us. Speaking as a redeemed human being, that is life transforming.

 

[JMMJ]

Rather perfect love exists in perfect and complete freedom. It is the total and perfect outpouring for the good of another. So love is THE completeness of God, not a restriction on God.

But then you get into the question of whether or not we really do have perfect and complete freedom. God, afterall, created everything. That means he created hell. Are we really free with that hanging over our heads.

I know Catholics do the pretzel thing all over this question when it is raised by non believers. It doesn’t convince most of them. This isn’t a path I would go down if I was trying to convince someone that “God is love”.

 

[Wesrock]

goout:

Rather perfect love exists in perfect and complete freedom. It is the total and perfect outpouring for the good of another. So love is THE completeness of God, not a restriction on God.

But then you get into the question of whether or not we really do have perfect and complete freedom. God, afterall, created everything. That means he created hell. Are we really free with that hanging over our heads.

I know Catholics do the pretzel thing all over this question when it is raised by non believers. It doesn’t convince most of them. This isn’t a path I would go down if I was trying to convince someone that “God is love”.

Yes, and it’s contrary to modern day popular notions that punishment can be consistent with love, though I disagree with that.

But I digress. All creation is a free gift of goodness from God,* and God does not receive anything in return. That’s the most selfless gift possible.

*I don’t expect you to accept this just because I say so here or what I say next, but this is Catholic theology which the Catholic would say can also be demonstrated from reason alone. But in context of Catholic beliefs, once they’ve been articulated and presented, the objection poses no issue.

 

[goout]

goout:

Rather perfect love exists in perfect and complete freedom. It is the total and perfect outpouring for the good of another. So love is THE completeness of God, not a restriction on God.

But then you get into the question of whether or not we really do have perfect and complete freedom. God, afterall, created everything. That means he created hell. Are we really free with that hanging over our heads.

I know Catholics do the pretzel thing all over this question when it is raised by non believers. It doesn’t convince most of them. This isn’t a path I would go down if I was trying to convince someone that “God is love”.

I personally don’t try to convince people of anything in terms that do not resonate. It;s like striking a trumpet with a mallet and expecting it to sing.

We are free to the degree we are united with God’s will.
For instance: A person who becomes addicted to pornography has practiced vice to the degree that his ability to actively choose the good is impaired. That person becomes progressively enslaved.

I am free to love to the degree I am united to God’s will, which is perfect love.

 

[goout]

But I digress. All creation is a free gift of goodness from God,* and God does not receive anything in return. That’s the most selfless gift possible.

Wow. This dovetails nicely with Bp Barron’s homily for this week. about 15 mins,

https://www.wordonfire.org/resources/homily/grace-and-the-aporia-of-the-gift/6022/

 

[steve-b]

Yes, I am talking about the way Jews portray Gd in that they do not depict Him as Gd is Love since Gd is many other things besides love, including justice, truth, perfection, universal, sovereign, spirit rather than flesh, and one. To limit Gd by this statement is contrary to Jewish thinking and theology. In fact, Jews prefer to describe Gd by what He is NOT rather than what He is. Your comment is touching on another interesting issue, namely, who is and is not considered to be a Jew.

However,

Love​

Does not restrict or limit God’s description in any way.

Paul (Saul prior to conversion) was chief student of Rabbi (Rabban) Gamaliel before Jesus converted him. Paul’s writings are inspired by the Holy Spirit (the 3rd person of God, in the Blessed Trinity). As Jesus (2nd person of the Blessed Trinity) said, The HS does not speak on His own authority, but takes from Jesus and passes THAT on. From Jn 16:12-15

Therefore

what Paul writes here Re: Love , came from, (inspired) from God… In whom God said back in Genesis, let US make man in our image and likeness

 

[meltzerboy2]

The last verse you cite (which again is another issue) is interpreted by Jews as either the magisterial “we” OR the humility of Gd, Who consults with His angels, in the act of creation. Jews are not disinclined to have more than one explanation for a verse, even if the two explanations are, to our logic and reason, contradictory. Perhaps this is because, according to Judaism, Gd is so multidimensional in His omniscience that opposing forces within Him are in fact NOT contradictory. Thus justice is NOT opposed to mercy when speaking of Gd, and neither is love opposed to wrath. So you see, to reiterate my main point, saying that Gd is Love is indeed limiting His multidimensionality, including His complexity AND simplicity.

I do LOVE, however, that beautiful passage from Corinthians which you cite despite not being Christian, perhaps because I, and all of us, was made in the image and likeness of Gd and thus contain a pale reflection of Gd’s attributes such as His ability to reconcile contradictory notions.

 

[STT]

But feeling occur and in that sense, exist, correct? They have an objective energy, they can be somewhat measured in human physiology.

So you mean that God is a sort of electromagnetic energy? I don’t think so.

 

[steve-b]

The last verse you cite (which again is another issue) is interpreted by Jews as either the magisterial “we” OR the humility of Gd, Who consults with His angels, in the act of creation. Jews are not disinclined to have more than one explanation for a verse, even if the two explanations are, to our logic and reason, contradictory.

I understand. And in this case, You are speaking for Jews who don’t accept Jesus and all the explanations of the OT in relation to the NT,. I get it.

And

As you hint, one also has to admit one’s interpretation can be 100% wrong… true?

meltzerboy2:

Perhaps this is because, according to Judaism, Gd is so multidimensional in His omniscience that opposing forces within Him are in fact NOT contradictory.

If God is perfect in every sense, how then, can there be opposing forces within Him?

meltzerboy2:

Thus justice is NOT opposed to mercy when speaking of Gd, and neither is love opposed to wrath. So you see, to reiterate my main point, saying that Gd is Love is indeed limiting His multidimensionality, including His complexity AND simplicity.

Maybe an example will work.

When a soul ends up in hell, is it because

1. God doesn’t love that soul anymore?

or

1. is it because God gives the soul who they ultimately are, what they want. One who doesn’t love God back, God respects that choice, and sends them where there is no love for God.

That’s NOT on God, it’s not God’s fault, that’s all on the individual soul.

meltzerboy2:

I do LOVE, however, that beautiful passage from Corinthians which you cite despite not being Christian, perhaps because I, and all of us, was made in the image and likeness of Gd and thus contain a pale reflection of Gd’s attributes such as His ability to reconcile contradictory notions.

God does not force Himself on us. He gave all of us free will. He doesn’t take that away. It’s actually what makes us all culpable for what we choose. Life or death blessings or curses. God says choose life and blessings not death and curses. Without free will we would be guilty of nothing. But we DO have free will.

It’s all about choosing correctly throughout life

 

[steve-b]

The last verse you cite (which again is another issue) is interpreted by Jews as either the magisterial "we" OR the humility of Gd, Who consults with His angels, in the act of creation.

As a followup I have 2 questions

could you describe what you mean by magisterial "we". ?

AND

Angels are Created spiritual beings. Why would God need their (name removed by moderator)ut for creation or in the act of creation?

 

[meltzerboy2]

The magisterial “we” refers to the way a king or queen would talk, that is, instead of saying “I,” they would use the plural “we.” It denotes authority.

The point is just that: Gd does NOT need to consult with the angels to create the universe, but He does so out of humility and so that they do not feel embarrassed by His sovereignty over them. It is like a partnership, which, by the way, is one of the characteristics of the Law between Gd and humanity, according to Judaism. Gd does His share and mankind is expected to do its part in keeping the Law.

 

[steve-b]

The magisterial “we” refers to the way a king or queen would talk, that is, instead of saying “I,” they would

The point is just that: Gd does NOT need to consult with the angels to create the universe, but He does so out of humility and so that they do not feel embarrassed by His sovereignty over them. It is like a partnership, which, by the way, is one of the characteristics of the Law between Gd and humanity, according to Judaism. Gd does His share and mankind is expected to do its part in keeping the Law.

Then there is the approach by the Jews for Jesus

 

[OneSheep]

So you mean that God is a sort of electromagnetic energy? I don’t think so.

I don’t think so either, definitely not limited to some small aspect of existence.

What I am saying is that “feelings”, if you are talking about, an emotional aspect of love, are detectable and somewhat measurable in the human brain by using certain equipment. The nerve impulses are not God, but, like all of our being, are a result of something created by Him, something in His image.

So feelings, though subjective, have an objective aspect, and like I said Love (as God) though objective has a very subjective aspect in the sense that we all experience God differently.

Thus, we have the basis for a connection between a human emotional experience and the objective reality of a God who created us and cares for us. Of course, it can be said that Love is much more than either an objective reality or an emotional experience; that love is also a tie between us all, a commitment we can make to one another, etc.

These are all manifestations of Love, a ubiquitous tie between all that is, a source of all mercy and compassion.