It is the parent-child relation that is being expressed. We lowly creatures can never be worthy of anything but death, but God has offered to adopt us as His children and the offer to completely wipe out everything forever that we have done that has made us unworthy.
The phrase “God loves you” is typically used in the context of reassuring individuals that the Creator takes an interest in their personal life, and that that personal interest is a positive one. The emphasis is not on divinity itself, and not just on love. The reason for the use of the term is the emphasis on “you.”
There is quite a gap between a Creator of the Universe and his paying attention to an individual’s situation. The phrase is used in Christian circles as a reassurance that the Almighty pays attention to every detail of the individual’s life circumstance, and does so in a way that reflects loving intervention (as opposed to spite, for example).
The degree to which it is reassuring depends on the degree to which one accepts the underlying premise of a God who Intervenes in Personal Lives.
God loves us all.
He’s just not very good at showing it. :eek:
There is no Larry Borgia, makes just as much sense.
We are made in the image of God, perfect, eternal, and worthy. It is a mistake to belittle ourselves and claim unworthiness. We are worthy of joy, peace, and love. It is within all of us just waiting to be acknowledged and released.
Perhaps you are not very good at accepting it.
Thaaaat’s a-nice. . . . . . . . :rolleyes:
Of course, the Greeks who went to see the Oracle of Delphi usually said that they felt the presence of Apollo. Greeks, Romans, Persians, Hindus, Vikings, ancient Celts, etc. etc. have all “felt” the presence of their gods over the thousands of years they worshiped these entities. Indeed, there are some 700 million Hindus or more who believe in the Hindu Gods and worship them right now.
Now, I think, Algher, that you and I have this in common. We both agree that Zeus, Apollo, Jupiter, Mithra, Vishnu, Rama, Krishna, Thor, Wodin, Toutatis, etc. etc. are NOT REAL and never were. Do we both agree on that point?
So we both agree that literally hundreds of millions, perhaps billions, of people over the millennia, have said that they could “feel and see and hear” the presence of dieties that were nothing but a creation of their imagination? Do you agree?
We agree that the Aztecs tore the living hearts out of thousands of victims to offer them to Huitzipochtli and their other gods, all of whom you and I agree were non-existant creations of the human imagination, right?
But when you, Algher, can feel and see and hear God’s presence (may I jump to the conclusion that you are talking about the Abahamic God?) then this time, it is real, right? :dubious:
Thaaaaaaat’s a-nice. . . . . . . :rolleyes: )*
**(The origin of the phrase “That’s a-nice”: Two Italian immigrant ladies are talking. One of them goes on for an hour about how all her kids worship her and are all ultra-sucessful. At the end of every sentence the other lady says: “That’s a-nice”.
Finally, the blowhard says to the other lady, “And what have your kids done for you?”
The other lady says: "They sent me on a course to learn deportment. I used to say “bullshit”. Now I say “That’s a-nice”. 
*
I will not take responsibility for defending lekatt’s assertion. However, your assertion that God is insane is patently ridiculous. Sanity has to do with a normative condition for a particular type of being. It has not objective meaning, only a purely subjective one. Judging God, a unique entity by the criteria that you would judge a human being’s sanity is ludicrous. God loves his creation. Conditions are subsets of that creation. So if he loves the totality of creation, then he loves the subsets as part of that creation, but unlike a mortal, he does not love that creation through the medium of its subsets. He loves creation as a cohesive whole, we love creation as a backdrop for our lives. That is the difference between Unconditional and Conditional love.
[singing] Andy walks with me,
Andy talks with me,
Andy tells me I am His own. [/singing] 
Originally Posted by Psalm 14:1
The fool hath said in his heart:
We all know that quote: “The Fool has said in his heart “There is no God”. They are corrupt, they do abominable deeds, there is none that does good.”
If you would like to see a video featuring a list of those alleged fools who do no good, see this Youtube video. It has been viewed over 400,000 times and received four out of five stars. Most interesting, it appears to be produced by a young man or teenager.
AND PLEASE DO NOT BOTHER TO RESPOND WITH A LIST OF SMART PEOPLE WHO HAVE BEEN OR ARE THEISTS. That is not the point of my posting. The point is to refute Psalm 14:1, NOT to hold a smarter-than-thou competition.
Is that not a ludicrous judgment as well? Or does that only apply to negative judgements about God?
No it applies to anthropomorphization. Has nothing to do with whether it is a positive or negative characterization. Saying that God loves Kittens more than he loves Puppies would be ludicrous.
Caveat: All attempts to define God by the limited facility of language are dodgy.
Sorry, I had a few when I wrote that. That’s more abrupt than I usually like to be. (Not that I’m taking back my statement, just its impolitic tone.)
When God starts posting on the Dope, you might have a point.
You should really try to avoid contradicting yourself so blatantly. We are lowly creatures that can never deserve anything but death, and are worthy of joy, peace, and love ? That’s not even coherent.
Incorrect. Detachment from reality is a form of insanity that has nothing to do with speices, and unconditional love or unconditional anything is most certainly detached from reality by definition.
And “loves” isn’t anthropomorphizing ?
And by the way, I will say that I find this insistance that God loves me and you and everyone creepy and stalkerish. I don’t believe in the bronze age idiot, but if he is real I do NOT want his love; I want to be left alone. Where do people get this idea that “unconditional love” is at all desirable, anyway ?
When Larry Borgia starts constituting Protons Neutrons and Electrons into elements out of which I can fashion a computer that I can use to post on the dope, then I’ll start believing in Larry Borgia. 
I’m pretty sure I exist.
You realize that computers are made by factories, not God, don’t you ?
Cogitos ergo es.
I know I have brought this up in another thread, but using the principle of Occam’s Razor, which is the simplest explanation?
-
The material universe is uncreated, simply exists and has always existed.
-
God is uncreated, simply exists and has always existed, and then went on to create the material universe.
Notice which one is simpler?
I work for companies that build computers, and God is no where around. In fact a lot of us are atheists. Given the current state of the industry, Christians are a minority. Krishna has a lot more to do with computers than Jesus (in fact he used to work for me. 
)