# Christians: when you say that God loves humanity, what exactly do you mean? **URL:** \ **Category:** Great Debates\ **Created:** [August 9, 2011, 6:27pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/christians-when-you-say-that-god-loves-humanity-what-exactly-do-you-mean/592109 "2011-08-09T18:27:44Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 14\ **Page:** 6
**Author:** ![Left\_Hand\_of\_Dorkness](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/left_hand_of_dorkness/32/7156_2.png) [@Left\_Hand\_of\_Dorkness](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Left_Hand_of_Dorkness)\ **Post date:** [August 10, 2011, 3:05pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/christians-when-you-say-that-god-loves-humanity-what-exactly-do-you-mean/592109/101 "2011-08-10T15:05:22Z")
> [@Bricker](#): > > Now, you may focus myopically on the question of why that was the only way, or the best way, to reunite mother, father, and child. But that question misses the point. I’m sorry, but I don’t think it misses the point at all. If I conceive of omnipotence, I can easily conceive of a better way to let the priest know: telling him directly as soon as the mom-to-be is pregnant, and letting him exercise his free will at that point. Such a strategy makes for boring storytelling, though, which is why the excellent show Wonderfalls resorted to Rube Goldbergian machinations for the doing of good deeds. Is this an accurate statement of your beliefs? God loves us as a father. He does the best he can by us, within the limits of not affecting our free will, not doing the logically impossible, and not doing a few other things according to limits I’m unaware of. When we see something like children born with agonizing terminal defects that nobody could have prevented or foreseen, that’s because that’s the best God could do by us given those other limits I’m unaware of. ---
**Author:** ![Bricker](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/977dab/32.png) [@Bricker](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bricker)\ **Post date:** [August 10, 2011, 3:08pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/christians-when-you-say-that-god-loves-humanity-what-exactly-do-you-mean/592109/102 "2011-08-10T15:08:57Z")
> [@Meatros](#): > > I did not meant to limit your choices - if that choice is unsatisfactory, I implore you to elaborate on it or change it. If I had to start from scratch, ‘feel it in my heart’ might have been the phrase I’d have chosen. While the two are similar, and in fact probably describe the same innate sense, ‘heart’ conveys a certain spirituality that ‘gut’ lacks. > [@](#): > > It seems to me that such a response is not quite as convincing as the physical response of an actual father with his child. In other words, out of the two - a father physically there to comfort his child and a feeling in the gut of God comforting you, it seems to me that the father physically being there is superior. Maybe you could argue that they are equal, I suppose. > > In either case, this is odd, considering that God is vastly superior to the father in every conceivable way. Yes, when you say ‘it seems to me’ that the father being there is superior, it shows only that you have failed to take into account the fobusionite issue. When you account for fobusionite, it becomes clear the path that God must take. > [@](#): > > So why do we have to comfort our children at all? Why, when we do comfort them, do they not always say something to the effect of ‘it’s okay daddy, God has assured me that this pain is necessary’? Because we know that our children don’t understand fobusionite any more than we do, and so are unlikely to be comforted by it. > [@](#): > > Okay, so you are unaware of other individual’s experiences, right? They may or may not receive the same treatment that you have experience - you don’t know(I’m not trying to be confrontation here, it just seems to me that this element might now be off the table in our discussion). > > Now, you may extend this answer to the following question: > > Do all children going through pain/suffering/etc have this experience of God (or a similar one)? > > By children, I mean under whatever age of accountability you feel is rational to accept (supposing there is one, of course). No, I doubt they do. > [@](#): > > Convinced of what, exactly? There are more explanations of evil in the bible then Job’s account. Further, Job’s account is that we are unable to understand the purpose of suffering, it isn’t an explanation of why there is suffering, per say. Correct – it’s a statement that it would do no good to explain the issue, because we could not understand it. It would be just like making up a word – say, like _fobusionite_ and assigning it as the reason. Then when people say they don’t know what the word means, you can explain that if they did, they’d understand it. > [@](#): > > Some people believe in God. Most people believe that evil/suffering/pain are a problem for an omnimax God. The only way out of this problem is to stipulate that there must be a reason for it. > > For people who already believe in God, this is enough. For people who don’t, it isn’t. True. If you don’t believe, this is hardly a satisfactory answer. > [@](#): > > BTW - thank you for engaging with me - I realize that it’s not easy to be on the ‘hot seat’ even if you have good reasons for your position. You’re welcome. I have excellent subjective reasons for my position, but I’m the first to realize that my position is not objectively reasonable. ---
**Author:** ![Bricker](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/977dab/32.png) [@Bricker](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bricker)\ **Post date:** [August 10, 2011, 3:09pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/christians-when-you-say-that-god-loves-humanity-what-exactly-do-you-mean/592109/103 "2011-08-10T15:09:58Z")
> [@Left\_Hand\_of\_Dorkness](#): > > I’m sorry, but I don’t think it misses the point at all. If I conceive of omnipotence, I > Is this an accurate statement of your beliefs? > > God loves us as a father. He does the best he can by us, within the limits of not affecting our free will, not doing the logically impossible, and not doing a few other things according to limits I’m unaware of. When we see something like children born with agonizing terminal defects that nobody could have prevented or foreseen, that’s because that’s the best God could do by us given those other limits I’m unaware of. Yes. ---
**Author:** ![Skald\_the\_Rhymer](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/ecccb3/32.png) [@Skald\_the\_Rhymer](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Skald_the_Rhymer)\ **Post date:** [August 10, 2011, 3:23pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/christians-when-you-say-that-god-loves-humanity-what-exactly-do-you-mean/592109/104 "2011-08-10T15:23:52Z")
> [@Diogenes\_the\_Cynic](#): > > What do you say to people who feel Krishna in their guts? > > This is the standard default for believers who are really challenged to provide evidence that God ever communicates with anybody. “I just know it in my heart.” Not much of an answer, is it? You certainly can’t use it to argue that God has ever communicated with ME, so does that mean God doesn’t love me. Are you going to give me your circular argument that I have to _believe_ first? You’re aware that belief is not volitional, aren’t you? It’s not a choice. > > And hasn’t it ever occurred to you that you might be deluding yourself that God is comforting you? How do you know you aren’t? Do the logical problems with your beliefs never give you pause? > > It’s not even an attempt justification, period. God does not attempt to justify himself in the story, just asserts (without the slightest justification) that Job has no right to ask for any justification. > > Incidentally, people seem to forget that the story DOES tell us the reason that God fucked with Job (which included murdering his children, by the way). It wasn’t for any ineffable, mysterious, greater good. It was to win a bet with Satan. Then when called on his bullshit, God just throws a temper tantrum and swings his dick around, and refuses to explain himself to Job. > > I had an OT prof who was convinced that the book of Job was intentional satire - the original shaggy dog story - that the story was _mocking_ the “mysterious ways” dodge. I think he was right. Have you ever actually read the whole book? I think people have a basic idea of the book, but I don’t think many have actually read it all the way through. Try reading it as satire. It works. God behaves like a child in the book. > > Convinced of what? Suddenly I have a vision of you as a highwayman in the Old West, Dio – travelling the countryside with a band of rogues, attacking stagecoaches and taking their booty for yourself. You must miss those days, to be so intent on hijacking this thread. ---
**Author:** ![Marley23](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/45deac/32.png) [@Marley23](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Marley23)\ **Post date:** [August 10, 2011, 3:34pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/christians-when-you-say-that-god-loves-humanity-what-exactly-do-you-mean/592109/105 "2011-08-10T15:34:48Z")
> [@Diogenes\_the\_Cynic](#): > > And hasn’t it ever occurred to you that you might be deluding yourself that God is comforting you? How do you know you aren’t? Do the logical problems with your beliefs never give you pause? > [@Marley23](#): > > Take all discussions related to the existence of gods, godly evil, free will, and the biological basis of love to another thread immediately. They’re all hijacks here. **This is the last time I’m going to tell you to stay on topic.** ---
**Author:** ![Indygrrl](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/i/58f4c7/32.png) [@Indygrrl](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Indygrrl)\ **Post date:** [August 10, 2011, 3:50pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/christians-when-you-say-that-god-loves-humanity-what-exactly-do-you-mean/592109/106 "2011-08-10T15:50:30Z")
> [@Bricker](#): > > What does a child understand about cancer, especially cancer that has yet to affect the child physically? The child might say, “How can it possibly be necessary to inject chemicals into my body that make me feel sick, and lose my hair, and vomit, when I feel perfectly fine without them?” > > You, as the parent, understand things that the child cannot. You might explain to the child that there’s a bad thing inside their body… but the child doesn’t really understand or grasp this. > > Now we turn to your demands – you demand to know the necessity of the terrible things that happened to a nine year old girl. But you wouldn’t – in fact, you cannot – understand or comprehend the answer. So you’re in the same position as the cancer-suffering child is: you demand answers that you cannot understand, but if you could understand them, you would know why such horrors are necessary. > > That’s the model I am contending is proper to understand God’s love. Please note I’m not talking here about the accuracy or underlying truth of the model. I’m answering the OP’s question. I’m sure whether God really has a plan that surpasseth understanding will be a wonderful debate topic for another thread. Here, I’m providing that concept as the answer to the question about how God’s love should be perceived. I think I understand what you’re saying here, but if that is how god shows his “love” it doesn’t make him sound very benevolent to me. The suffering that is going on en masse at any point in time makes it hard for me to believe there’s a lesson in there that’s meant for the rest of us. It also neglects to explain why history repeats itself. Why hasn’t god made it so we don’t repeat those same horrors over and over again? I think your answer is that his machinations are so far out of our realm of understanding that we can never comprehend them. And that brings me back around to the question, what is the point of having lessons if we never understand what they are? I hope that’s not as convoluted as I think it is, lol. That always happens to me when I think about this sort of thing. I’m an atheist, but I have a theory that any creator/god/sky unicorn who created the universe and designed people is more mad scientist than benevolent entity. Nature itself is a good example. In my imagination the old guy with the white beard is thinking, “Those peons thought the earthquake was scary? I’m going to throw a couple of tsunami’s their way and wipe out their food supply to see what they do. And I’m gonna see if those silly churchgoers in New Orleans still worship me after I flood their city and destroy their homes.” And of course, that goes on and on endlessly. Would religious folks say that satan is to blame for these types of things? I can’t help noticing god gets the credit for everything wonderful and good, but he never seems to get blamed for the horrors. I don’t really believe in a god, even though my mad scientist theory makes more sense to me than anything I’ve heard from devout people with regard to religious dogma. (I hope this is on topic. I got a little confuzzled about halfway through the thread.) ---
**Author:** ![Left\_Hand\_of\_Dorkness](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/left_hand_of_dorkness/32/7156_2.png) [@Left\_Hand\_of\_Dorkness](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Left_Hand_of_Dorkness)\ **Post date:** [August 10, 2011, 4:04pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/christians-when-you-say-that-god-loves-humanity-what-exactly-do-you-mean/592109/107 "2011-08-10T16:04:34Z")
> [@Bricker](#): > > Yes. Fair enough. I obviously find that answer intensely unsatisfactory for myself, for reasons both that exceed the scope of this thread and that are already familiar to anyone who know the word “theodicy,” but I appreciate your explanation. ---
**Author:** ![Bricker](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/977dab/32.png) [@Bricker](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bricker)\ **Post date:** [August 10, 2011, 4:22pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/christians-when-you-say-that-god-loves-humanity-what-exactly-do-you-mean/592109/108 "2011-08-10T16:22:28Z")
> [@Indygrrl](#): > > I think I understand what you’re saying here, but if that is how god shows his “love” it doesn’t make him sound very benevolent to me. The suffering that is going on en masse at any point in time makes it hard for me to believe there’s a lesson in there that’s meant for the rest of us. It also neglects to explain why history repeats itself. Why hasn’t god made it so we don’t repeat those same horrors over and over again? I think your answer is that his machinations are so far out of our realm of understanding that we can never comprehend them. And that brings me back around to the question, what is the point of having lessons if we never understand what they are? We don’t try to teach the cancer-suffering child a lesson when we give him chemotherapy. And that child doesn’t think the nurse that hooks up his arm to the chemo treatment is very benevolent. There’s no reason to assume that God’s purpose in allowing suffering is to teach of a lesson. I personally think of it as more of a necessary consequence of the design of the world. ---
**Author:** ![Meatros](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/b4bc9f/32.png) [@Meatros](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Meatros)\ **Post date:** [August 10, 2011, 5:14pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/christians-when-you-say-that-god-loves-humanity-what-exactly-do-you-mean/592109/109 "2011-08-10T17:14:05Z")
> [@Bricker](#): > > Yes, when you say ‘it seems to me’ that the father being there is superior, it shows only that you have failed to take into account the fobusionite issue. > > When you account for fobusionite, it becomes clear the path that God must take. I appreciate the discussion we’ve had and I feel like we are at a place where we can wrap things up between us - however, I did want to ask you something relate to this. I didn’t want to assume your position, so if your answer seems as though it should be obvious, it’s because I’m trying not to second guess you. So, my question is, how does this seem to **you**? Does it seem to you that the father (you could sub in ‘father’ for a human figure that would bring you comfort in a time of pain) being there is superior (or at least equal) to the experience of God being there (or in your heart, I’m not sure how to phrase this)? Related: To me, it seems as though the father being there is more important to the child than an experience of God. Do you think this is the case as well for the child? If not, why isn’t it? We aren’t talking about understanding why the pain is occurring - so neither the father nor the experience would provide such to the child - we are talking about the comfort that is attained from the father or the experience of God. ---
**Author:** ![Bricker](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/977dab/32.png) [@Bricker](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bricker)\ **Post date:** [August 10, 2011, 6:55pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/christians-when-you-say-that-god-loves-humanity-what-exactly-do-you-mean/592109/110 "2011-08-10T18:55:50Z")
> [@Meatros](#): > > I appreciate the discussion we’ve had and I feel like we are at a place where we can wrap things up between us - however, I did want to ask you something relate to this. I didn’t want to assume your position, so if your answer seems as though it should be obvious, it’s because I’m trying not to second guess you. > > So, my question is, how does this seem to **you**? Does it seem to you that the father (you could sub in ‘father’ for a human figure that would bring you comfort in a time of pain) being there is superior (or at least equal) to the experience of God being there (or in your heart, I’m not sure how to phrase this)? As a child, I think i would have answered that physical presence of a father was superior. But I think that’s because as a child, my Daddy knew everything and could handle everything. He was ten feet tall and strong as an ox and he knew exactly what to do in every single situation. As an adult, I know all too well that I am not that man, even though I suspect my son still sees things that way… he recently was traveling with his grandmother and they missed a connecting flight, and he was quite nervous and upset. But in January, his mom and I were traveling with him, and the same thing happened – same airport, same leg of a flight, same destinations… he was not in the least disconcerted then. So as an adult, I find the comfort God gives of more help than the comfort a person gives. ---
**Author:** ![vivalostwages](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/v/d07c76/32.png) [@vivalostwages](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/vivalostwages)\ **Post date:** [August 11, 2011, 10:00pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/christians-when-you-say-that-god-loves-humanity-what-exactly-do-you-mean/592109/111 "2011-08-11T22:00:39Z")
> [@kanicbird](#): > > Here is my take on this. God is able and often takes people out of their suffering though we can not see it. He lessens it on the person going through it. In scriptures there is a great deal of some people experiencing things that others do not and a lot of suffering that a person should have experienced that God shielded them from. > > In this case God sent His daughter into this world, the powers of this world (AKA Satan), went to destroy her. God did allow it in this case, but IMHO providing her with needed protection from torment during that time, and in the end world forces could not have her give up on Love and hope as we see her hugging the stuffed animal. It is very possible that God could have created a real soul in that animal to comfort her. > > Yes her body was destroyed but her soul was freed of this evil place, and God won as she didn’t give up on God. > > In Job we can see the battle for God’s children, who will have them, Satan or God. The children that Satan gets are the people who seek to control others, without love in their heart, the ones that torment and kill others as you expressed. The ones that destroy. > > Also in Job, who is one who experienced suffering, we see the point of suffering, to show us our error that we would never have learned any other way (Job repented in the end). I believe any suffering God does not block and allows us to experience is only the suffering we need to realize our error, in other words God blocks all unnecessary suffering. > > Eventually all that destroy will be destroyed and learn that the choice they made (to be evil) was wrong, and effects of karma (scripturally you reap what you sow) means that eventually they will not be strong enough to stay evil, and have to request that God takes custody over them instead of Satan. > > So all children will be saved, it’s just a matter of how long they can resist God and stay evil. > > But for the little children of God such as this girl IMHO she didn’t suffer what we saw and assumed she did, for if she did God would be a monster, and that’s not the God I worship. My evidence of a good God is her still hugging that bear, her innocence was never taken. Or maybe she was terrified and had reverted to her toddler days. I really don’t know what was in her mind. Then again, neither do you…yet you often presume to know what other people have thought or are thinking. In past threads, you have assumed/posited that women who choose not to have babies made that choice because they’ve been warped by modern society; that rapists and their victims have soul ties; and so on. Assuming something does not make it so. ---
**Author:** ![monavis](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/e0b2c6/32.png) [@monavis](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/monavis)\ **Post date:** [August 13, 2011, 11:08am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/christians-when-you-say-that-god-loves-humanity-what-exactly-do-you-mean/592109/112 "2011-08-13T11:08:40Z")
> [@Bricker](#): > > Christians speak of God as the Father, and that’s not a bad model for what I imagine God’s love to be. If I can trot out a stereotype or two, a mother’s love is thought of as more consuming and less remote. Dad might be more willing to let his son scrape a knee learning to skatebaord, while Mom wrings her hands at the thought of her baby bleeding. > > And it’s well to remember that just as a parent is an adult and can see things more clearly than can a child, not all things that appear to be terrible are. A child may dislike the bitter taste of medicine and cavil at the necessity of taking it, while the parent knows that as unpleasant as the medicine is, it’s taken for a good reason. The child might be upset at not visiting Disney; the parent knows that it’s better to be able to buy school uniforms than see Goofy. The difference is: that a Human father doesn’t know for sure or a head of time what is truly the best for his child, nor would he punish all his grand children or his linage because of some thing an ignorant child did, nor does he keep himslf hidden from his children, or punish them because they now knew good from evil. Were a human father to treat his children as the Abrahamic God does, he would be put in jail! ---
**Author:** ![monavis](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/e0b2c6/32.png) [@monavis](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/monavis)\ **Post date:** [August 13, 2011, 11:15am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/christians-when-you-say-that-god-loves-humanity-what-exactly-do-you-mean/592109/113 "2011-08-13T11:15:15Z")
> [@OneMissedPost](#): > > The Christian perspective on this is that Jesus (the son of God) loves everyone unconditionally. He loves us like the ideal parents - loving their children unconditionally. He loved us so much that He endured the weight of all of humanity’s sins and died for our sins. > > In the Old Testament, God was shown as vengeful. If people would sin, He would punish them without forgiveness. Jesus forgives much like parents forgive their children for mistakes. All we have to do is ask for forgiveness and we shall receive forgiveness. > > Now, there are debates on whether or not Jesus was truly the son of God. It is popular belief that Jesus is God in human form. God sent His only son to die for our sins. It’s pretty complicated and there are many interpretations on this. Many Christians believe that God, the Holy Spirit, and The Son are part of the Holy Trinity (all part of the same-being). According to the psalmist Psalm 82 in KJV, The psalmist is quoted a s sayin,:I said you are gods and sons of the most high, Jesus used this when accused of blasphemy because he called God his father, he remined them of the psalmist and said, “it says in your Law you are gods”!! ---
**Author:** ![monavis](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/e0b2c6/32.png) [@monavis](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/monavis)\ **Post date:** [August 13, 2011, 11:25am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/christians-when-you-say-that-god-loves-humanity-what-exactly-do-you-mean/592109/114 "2011-08-13T11:25:21Z")
> [@Diogenes\_the\_Cynic](#): > > The religious question can’t be answered unless the terms are defined. > > The OP’s question can’t be answered without a non-biolgical definition of the word “love.” There are many different definitions of the word Love, just as there are many different definitions of the word God. To me the word Love means doing well and wishing another person well. No matter the circumstance one is in. Is that a definite translation?..I don’t know, but it is the one that suits me best. One can love a person, but not love some of the actions or deeds it does. Just hope the person can rectify bad behavior, because of the harm it does to others or even himself in some manner( or time later on in his life)! [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/christians-when-you-say-that-god-loves-humanity-what-exactly-do-you-mean/592109.md?page=5)