What does "God loves you" mean?

Great Debates
101

[QUOTE=Chief Pedant]
What does it mean, then, to say, “God loves you?”

In your theology of God, is there no eternal damnation?
If not, you are certainly at odds with Christian tradition…
In standard Christian theology a fair percentage of souls will be bound by God into hell eternally. Even on earth here, a fair percentage are “bound” in many ways–physically bound to pain and suffering; mental anguish; retardation; …all sorts of ways that keep them from establishing a relationship with God because the world does not make sense to them or they are incapable of understanding it.
[/QUOTE]

God loves even those who go to Hell. While tradition certainly has the idea of God “casting” people into Hell, it’s not current dogma in the Catholic tradition. As for the Biblical part, again, Catholics take many parts un-literally.

What happens after we die is in large part a mystery. As for Heaven and Hell, I believe that, eternally speaking, “everyone gets what they want.” If the soul is open to God, then Heaven. If not, Hell. I’m a large fan of the quote “Heaven is Hell to those who dont desire it.” My personal belief is that God does not choose to send anyone to Hell. Whoever’s there, if anyone, gets there on their own.

Your last part, about those unable to form a connection with God, and the eternal implications of such a condition (similar to the condition of where unbaptized babies go) has been batted around over the centuries, but the Catholic church at least has never made an official declaration of it. My guess is Heaven, as Man is created Good.

If my memory serves me correctly, C.S. Lewis’ “The Great Divorce,” is an interesting read on this topic.

102

[QUOTE=mswas]
However, it should not be confused with the light from above that is providing sustenance here and now, and is the only thing that is actually true.

I’m sorry I missed this before. This is a good point.

I have a direct response to it, but I want to hear your answer to a related point first.

Intelligence is uncreated, simply exists and has always existed.
[/QUOTE]

What light from above? It is s cute metaphor, but what does it mean? What light are you referring to?

The question about intelligence is irrelevant. Intelligence is a quality possessed by a thinking being. It cannot exist by itself. It is like saying a smile existed before there were mouths, lips and teeth. Intelligence is the ability of a reasoning being to reason, deduct, think, extrapolate, predict, draw conslusions, etc. The more accurately and quickly a thinking being does this, the more we say it is intelligent.

103

[QUOTE=Malacandra]
How about you address the inanity of entering into a thread discussing what God’s love means and ignoring the basic premise - that the discussion necessarily entails an acceptance (for the sake of the argument) that God exists? Oh, wait, because on this hotbed of rampant evangelism that is GD the atheists don’t get enough opportunity to bellow that there is no God. That right?
[/QUOTE]

Funny how atheists “bellow”. What do theists do, mildly and politely reiterate perfect truths?

What if I started a thread on Bigfoot fur? Is it red or black? Is it thick enough to serve as an insulating pelt or is is just there for purposes of aiding in camouflage? Or does sexual selection play a role?

Well, you can discuss these questions if you want, but sooner or later someone is going to point out that it is all a lot of hooey one way or another, because there is no Bigfoot.

Would you like to start a thread about whether or not Leprechauns wear green hats? The discussion necessarily entails an acceptance (for the sake of the argument) that Leprechauns exist. :smiley:

104

[QUOTE=Autolycus]
God loves even those who go to Hell. While tradition certainly has the idea of God “casting” people into Hell, it’s not current dogma in the Catholic tradition. As for the Biblical part, again, Catholics take many parts un-literally.

What happens after we die is in large part a mystery. As for Heaven and Hell, I believe that, eternally speaking, “everyone gets what they want.” If the soul is open to God, then Heaven. If not, Hell. I’m a large fan of the quote “Heaven is Hell to those who dont desire it.” My personal belief is that God does not choose to send anyone to Hell. Whoever’s there, if anyone, gets there on their own.

Your last part, about those unable to form a connection with God, and the eternal implications of such a condition (similar to the condition of where unbaptized babies go) has been batted around over the centuries, but the Catholic church at least has never made an official declaration of it. My guess is Heaven, as Man is created Good.

If my memory serves me correctly, C.S. Lewis’ “The Great Divorce,” is an interesting read on this topic.
[/QUOTE]

I am unable to reconcile your comment that “In short, hate binds the person and love sets it free.” with the notion that “God loves even those who go to hell.”

“Hate binds…love sets free.” Which is it if God loves us? While we humans may bind ourselves with hate, why does a loving God not set us free?

105

[QUOTE=Chief Pedant]
I am unable to reconcile your comment that “In short, hate binds the person and love sets it free.” with the notion that “God loves even those who go to hell.”

“Hate binds…love sets free.” Which is it if God loves us? While we humans may bind ourselves with hate, why does a loving God not set us free?
[/QUOTE]

I think we have a misunderstanding here due to my poorly explained metaphor. Love, agape, strengthens the soul and uplifts the person. Hate, (or any sin I suppose), weakens it and brings the person down. I was using a dichotomy that is not perfect given my definition of agape. Agape is a giving of oneself, while hate is not really the with-holding of oneself, although I do think hate is intrinsically selfish.

I dont understand what you mean by “which is it?” God loves everyone, and it’s both. God has set us free, but we cant accept that freedom while holding onto hatred.

106

[QUOTE=Valteron]
Would you like to start a thread about whether or not Leprechauns wear green hats? The discussion necessarily entails an acceptance (for the sake of the argument) that Leprechauns exist. :smiley:
[/QUOTE]

I haven’t had a chance to read everything since my last post, but this caught my eye and I want to address it.

With no disrespect intended, I consider the Christ died for salvation story as mythology. It appears to be a rich and well thought out mythology (although not without a few logical inconsistencies), that is compelling enough that many people align their ideas of morality with it, and some devote their life to it. I’m sure even you, Valteron, will agree this puts it in a category of human thought than whimsical mythologies of Bigfoots and Leprechauns.

There is an interesting debate on the evidence of God and the proof of God and the question of the existence of God. This thread is not about those things. It cannot be helped that aspects of the “existence debate” will enter this discussion on the meaning of “God loves you.” I couldn’t avoid it in one of my own posts. But I do ask that we take the premise as stipulated.

Why? Well amongst many reasons, I do find that there are intelligent well spoken Christians that can answer these types of questions. I saw in passing a reference to C.S. Lewis’ “Great Divorce” This book (as does much of Lewis’ writing) does provide interesting food for thought on some of the mysteries of Christianity. I appreciate Autolycus’s mention of that book (it’s been a while since I’ve read it).

I see where you’re coming from Valteron, and for the most part you and I are on the same page. Again, I haven’t digested the whole discussion since my last post, and I’m looking forward to considering your posts along with everyone else’s. But jumping in in merely saying “there is no God” adds nothing to this debate because God’s existence is stipulated.

107

[QUOTE=Autolycus]
I can address some objections that I’ve read in this thread so far. First and foremost, is that unconditional love is insane/irrational. If love meant “the warm fuzzies” or “a wish for the other to be happy,” then yes, that would be insane. To use the examples of the child rapist or the wife abuser, yes it is irrational to wish the abuser or the rapist to be happy and to not be held accountable for their actions. But that’s not what Agape is. In Catholic theology, God’s Love is equivalent to God’s Justice. (OT, brimstone, yes yes that’s grounds for another thread). The point is that it’s possible to love somebody, even a very evil person, without being insane.
[/quote]
The problem isn’t the “love” part; the problem is the “unconditional” part. If love or hate or whatever is unconditional, then it’s completely unconnected to reality or rationality by definition. That’s a pretty good example of insanity.

[QUOTE=Autolycus]
God loves even those who go to Hell.
[/QUOTE]
A rather twisted version of love.

[QUOTE=Autolycus]
Love, agape, strengthens the soul and uplifts the person. Hate, (or any sin I suppose), weakens it and brings the person down.
[/QUOTE]
That’s simply not true. Sometimes love enslaves and destroys; sometimes hate sets you free and uplifts you. The slave who strikes down his master out of hate is more admirable than the spouse who forgives his or her abuser or manipulator every evil out of love.

108

[QUOTE=Der Trihs]
The problem isn’t the “love” part; the problem is the “unconditional” part. If love or hate or whatever is unconditional, then it’s completely unconnected to reality or rationality by definition. That’s a pretty good example of insanity.
[/QUOTE]

Christians are called to forgiveness in every circumstance, but this does not mean we are unconnected to reality or rationality. If my wallet is stolen, I would forgive the person. I call the cops and cancel all my cards, and I would be pissed off. If God forbid I was molested, I dont know if I would be able to forgive, but I would be called to do so by my faith. For those Bible-readers out there, the passage of note here is the “seventysevent times seven = forgiveness” passage, where-in the Jewish culture at the time this number meant Infinity

God’s love is justice. If somebody sins and does not accept forgiveness, God will not force salvation on anyone. Again, you appear to be stuck with this image of an angry God casting sinners into Hell. Nobody knows for sure of course, but that’s certainly not the God I believe in.
[/QUOTE]

Eros, Philos, and Storge can enslave and destroy, yes, but agape cannot. As for hate freeing a person, perhaps it can relatively speaking. If a person is seriously depressed, a hate-spree might give them energy. Still, your last part I must completely disagree with. While the end is more beneficial in an animal sense, the vengeful murder of the slave’s master is despicable. For the latter case, forgiveness in the sense would go hand-in-hand with seeking help, ala jailing the abuser, seeing a doctor, etc etc.

109

[QUOTE=Der Trihs]
The problem isn’t the “love” part; the problem is the “unconditional” part. If love or hate or whatever is unconditional, then it’s completely unconnected to reality or rationality by definition. That’s a pretty good example of insanity.
[/QUOTE]

Christians are called to forgiveness in every circumstance, but this does not mean we are unconnected to reality or rationality. If my wallet is stolen, I would forgive the person. I call the cops and cancel all my cards, and I would be pissed off. The act of forgiveness and the rational treatment of the robbery are two seperate things. If God forbid I was molested, I dont know if I would be able to forgive, but I would be called to do so by my faith. For those Bible-readers out there, the passage of note here is the “seventysevent times seven = forgiveness” passage, where-in the Jewish culture at the time this number meant Infinity

But, you might be saying that I am misinterpretting your post, and you are probably right. You seem to be saying that anything unconditional is insane, even if the person in the environment of the unconditional something is acting otherwise rationally.

What if, instead of concepts such as hate and love, we changed the category of unconditonals to things such as “bravery” or “wisdom.” Is unconditional bravery insane, or unconditional wisdom? I still dont see how acting consisently with one’s belief is insane, given that one realizes the standard one is living up to and the consequences of behaving thusly.

God’s love is justice. By this, I mean that the moral laws of the universe that God set up from the beginning, can not be arbitrarily changed. If somebody sins and does not accept forgiveness, God will not force salvation on anyone. Again, you appear to be stuck with this image of an angry God casting sinners into Hell. Nobody knows for sure of course, but that’s certainly not the God I believe in.
[/QUOTE]

Eros, Philos, and Storge can enslave and destroy, yes, but agape cannot. As for hate freeing a person, perhaps it can relatively speaking. If a person is seriously depressed, a hate-spree might give them energy. Still, your last part I must completely disagree with. While the end is more beneficial in an animal sense, the vengeful murder of the slave’s master is despicable. For the latter case, forgiveness in the sense would go hand-in-hand with seeking help, ala jailing the abuser, seeing a doctor, etc etc.

110

Gah, the 2nd one is the editted version, and I cant report my own posts…

111

[QUOTE=Chief Pedant]
I am unable to reconcile your comment that “In short, hate binds the person and love sets it free.” with the notion that “God loves even those who go to hell.”

“Hate binds…love sets free.” Which is it if God loves us? While we humans may bind ourselves with hate, why does a loving God not set us free?
[/QUOTE]

God can’t do for you what you must do for yourself. You are the one who holds the hate, so you must be the one to let it go.

God doesn’t send anyone to hell, nor does God punish anyone for anything. We humans punish ourselves through our own deeds and actions. Life here on planet earth is like a school for us to learn about ourselves by observing the deeds and actions of others. We learn from each other.

Fear is the big enemy, Fear leads to anger, anger leads to hate, and hate leads to suffering. The one who suffers is the one holding the fear.

Love dispells fear.

112

[QUOTE=lekatt]
God can’t do for you what you must do for yourself. You are the one who holds the hate, so you must be the one to let it go.

God doesn’t send anyone to hell, nor does God punish anyone for anything. We humans punish ourselves through our own deeds and actions. Life here on planet earth is like a school for us to learn about ourselves by observing the deeds and actions of others. We learn from each other.

Fear is the big enemy, Fear leads to anger, anger leads to hate, and hate leads to suffering. The one who suffers is the one holding the fear.

Love dispells fear.
[/QUOTE]

Scissors cuts paper, paper wraps rock, rock smashes scissors.

113

[QUOTE=Valteron]
Funny how atheists “bellow”. What do theists do, mildly and politely reiterate perfect truths?

What if I started a thread on Bigfoot fur? Is it red or black? Is it thick enough to serve as an insulating pelt or is is just there for purposes of aiding in camouflage? Or does sexual selection play a role?

Well, you can discuss these questions if you want, but sooner or later someone is going to point out that it is all a lot of hooey one way or another, because there is no Bigfoot.

Would you like to start a thread about whether or not Leprechauns wear green hats? The discussion necessarily entails an acceptance (for the sake of the argument) that Leprechauns exist. :smiley:
[/QUOTE]

Ever seen a discussion on whether anyone but Frodo could have carried the Ring to Mount Doom? The only objective answer is “Any character in LOTR could do whatever Tolkien felt inclined to put on paper. End of discussion.” And yet people still manage to have civilized debates on the matter accepting the convention that the argument will be founded on what Tolkien actually did write.

So I’d be happy to see a discussion on leprechauns, which would presumably be sourced from whatever has been written, said and generally agreed about leprechauns. I’d also be happy to see a thread about whether Thor could kick Hercules’s ass, where again presumably we’d discuss what feats have been attributed to both (Thor lifted the Midgard Serpent up to the sky, but Hercules held up the whole sky for a while)… and possibly, for some bizarre reason, we could discuss Frodo or leprechauns or Thor for quite a while before someone found it necessary to barge in and start threadshitting.

Please let me know if I bellowed in this post. :slight_smile:

114

[QUOTE=Czarcasm]
Scissors cuts paper, paper wraps rock, rock smashes scissors.
[/QUOTE]

There’s never a mod around when you want to report stupid drivebys in GD, is there? :dubious:

115

mswas, after reading more of your posts, and the time you failed to address a question is Jesus is the Son of God or not - not both. According to Jesus there is ONLY ONE way to God, through Jesus, though there are many paths one can chose from only one leads to God. This is not to say that others can’t give what appears to be divine inspiration & revelation. The way it is stated you can’t be a Christian and follow other paths - it does not work (‘I will chew you up and spit you out’ - God (Rev)). If you follow the teachings of any religion that denies Christ came in the flesh it is the religion of the Antichrist and will lead to destruction.

116

[QUOTE=Malacandra]
There’s never a mod around when you want to report stupid drivebys in GD, is there? :dubious:
[/QUOTE]

Maybe you are right, but sometimes I get tired of pseudo-philosophical bumper sticker philosophy like this:

I mean, come on now. Fear does not always lead to anger. Anger does not always lead to hate. Hate leads to suffering? On whose behalf, the hater or the hated? “The one who suffers is the one holding the fear.” Does this mean that if I’m suffering, it’s my fault?

117

[QUOTE=kanicbird]
mswas, after reading more of your posts, and the time you failed to address a question is Jesus is the Son of God or not - not both. According to Jesus there is ONLY ONE way to God, through Jesus, though there are many paths one can chose from only one leads to God. This is not to say that others can’t give what appears to be divine inspiration & revelation. The way it is stated you can’t be a Christian and follow other paths - it does not work (‘I will chew you up and spit you out’ - God (Rev)). If you follow the teachings of any religion that denies Christ came in the flesh it is the religion of the Antichrist and will lead to destruction.
[/QUOTE]

Of course that’s one of several possible interpretations of a 2000 year old book that contains what we *hope *are reasonably accurate quotes from JC. We’ve got serious evidence that the books, chosen by men for their own reasons to be in the Bible, were altered along the way.

I revere the teachings of Jesus and enjoy reading the Bible but over the years my interpretation of what it means has changed.

118

[QUOTE=Czarcasm]
Maybe you are right, but sometimes I get tired of pseudo-philosophical bumper sticker philosophy like this: I mean, come on now. Fear does not always lead to anger. Anger does not always lead to hate. Hate leads to suffering? On whose behalf, the hater or the hated? “The one who suffers is the one holding the fear.” Does this mean that if I’m suffering, it’s my fault?
[/QUOTE]

That’s a yes, you have total control over your beliefs, thoughts, and emotions. If you are suffering you need to figure out what you are doing to cause it.

119

[QUOTE=lekatt]
That’s a yes, you have total control over your beliefs, thoughts, and emotions. If you are suffering you need to figure out what you are doing to cause it.
[/QUOTE]

So, if I’m starving, hit by a car, shot by an thug in a dark alley, or struck down by a blood clot, the only reason I’m suffering is because I choose to?

120

[QUOTE=cosmosdan]
Of course that’s one of several possible interpretations of a 2000 year old book that contains what we hope are reasonably accurate quotes from JC.
[/QUOTE]

Well it’s not like it was passed down by oral tradition for 2000 years and just written down yesterday, as we do have text from pretty far back it it’s original form that can be referred to, and if you know how to translate Greek you can view online photo’s of it and translate it yourself.