 |
| Open Theism Discussion Board > Public Forums > Theological Q&A > God's Love, Part Deux | Forum Quick Jump
|
| 
Springs
Registered Member
Date Joined Jul 2001
Total Posts : 636
| Posted 8/6/2003 3:48 AM (GMT -6) |   | quote:
John: No doubt my even responding to this point brought up by others reveals my own latent "devil inside."
I don't know about that...but certainly your passive aggressive slip is showing. 
If Jesus accussed people face to face and you want to follow his example you could try something like this...Iconoclast, I recognize your intelligence but that IDEA is absurd.
Laika, did you get my email?
Springs | | Back to Top | | |
 |
trosie
Registered Member
Date Joined Jul 2001
Total Posts : 550
| Posted 8/6/2003 4:32 AM (GMT -6) | | I don't know if anyone read my post back on page four because I never received a response to my questions yet I would really appreciate understanding another way to view this.... I will post it again and see if I have any luck this time around:
For those who say that God loves Satan would you also then say that Satan could still be given an opportunity to change? Love bears all things, HOPES all things.... Would you say God is HOPING that Satan will yet love him? How do you define love when it comes to Satan and to those who are now in hell? Would you say that God loves unconditionally all those in hell yet isn't moved by the suffering of those in hell? Or will God FOREVER be grieved for those who chose not to accept God's love? Loving someone who has become antithetical to love doesn't compute in my brain. In my view it's like saying it's day and night at the same time -- God (who is love) loves hate.
| | Back to Top | | |
|
Starkman
Registered Member
Date Joined Oct 2001
Total Posts : 1747
| Posted 8/6/2003 5:12 AM (GMT -6) | | Hey Trosie,
quote:
For those who say that God loves Satan would you also then say that Satan could still be given an opportunity to change? Love bears all things, HOPES all things.... Would you say God is HOPING that Satan will yet love him? How do you define love when it comes to Satan and to those who are now in hell? Would you say that God loves unconditionally all those in hell yet isn't moved by the suffering of those in hell? Or will God FOREVER be grieved for those who chose not to accept God's love? Loving someone who has become antithetical to love doesn't compute in my brain. In my view it's like saying it's day and night at the same time -- God (who is love) loves hate.
Let's not let this get complicated. Figure it this way ... that God (agape) "loves" someone, anyone, is to say that God never changes in His character; He will always act rationally, respectfully and judiciously, etc. There's never going to be a time when God is spiteful, irrational, hateful or anything like that. So to say that God "loves" everyone, including Satan, is only to say that it is within the character of God to always demonstrate those unchanging characteristics God possess.
If we're going to make agape love an emotion or feeling, we're going to be in big trouble. If, however, we bring God's unchangable character into the agape picture, we can better understand how God "loves" everyone. The reason that it is so hard to do this, however--at least within the English langauge--is because we ascribe feeling and emotion to our usage of the word "love." Our limited vocabulary for expressing different kinds of love make it very difficult to communicate precisely.
Hope this helps,
Starkman | | Back to Top | | |
|
One Love
Registered Member
Date Joined Jan 2003
Total Posts : 13888
| Posted 8/6/2003 10:28 AM (GMT -6) | | I love the quote, Ross. Aces. 
Keepin it movin,
 | | Back to Top | | |
|
John Earp
Registered Member
Date Joined Oct 2002
Total Posts : 1715
| Posted 8/6/2003 12:39 PM (GMT -6) | | quote:
Originally posted by rossfadeinout
Hey everyone...
Fascinating discussion, Mephi, I'm right with you where you were at. You're argument is pretty accurate and in my view valid. For those who would hold that Satan is a personal being yet God ceases to love him because he is anti-love, does this apply to souls in hell, who in this life have solidified themselves against God? This seems less easy to swallow than the view that God doesn't love Satan...
I thought that this quote that I have in my journal was relevant to the discussion between Mephi and John Earp... quote:
God's concern is the prerequisite and source of His anger. It is because He cares for man that His anger may be kindled against men. Mercy and anger are not opposites but correlatives. ---Abraham Joshua Heschel
This quote is right on. Anger, wrath, punishment, even damnation do not mean that God does not love (PoW made this point somewhere). If God had no love in these cases, he would be merely apathetic toward those who rebel.
Keep it up Mephi, I'm enjoying working through this!
Ross
If hate can be subsumed in love, I wonder why God himself would juxtapose love and hate so often in the Bible? Jacob I have loved, and Esau I have hated....
"The Discovery of new truth will modify old views and opinions, and there is perhaps no end to this process with finite minds in any world." Charles G. Finney, Systematic Theology.
revivaltheology.net
| | Back to Top | | |
|
GregBoyd
Registered Member
Date Joined Jul 2001
Total Posts : 1818
| Posted 8/6/2003 7:35 PM (GMT -6) | | Question for Mr. Mephi:
1) If I understand you correctly, you believe that God's love is demonstrated by the sheer fact that he holds a being in existence.
2) If I understand you correctly, God loves all who exist unconditionally, which is why they continue to exist. Hence, no matter what a being does (Satan), the fact that he exists testifies to God's love for him. Anyone who thinks God no longer loves Satan, while Satan yet exists, doesn't consistently believe in UNCONDITIONAL LOVE.
Clear so far? Okay, now...
3) Now, unless you are a universalist, which I know you aren't, you must believe that Satan will ultimately either
a) be annihilated, or
b) suffer eternal hell.
I think there are conflicts between "3" (either "a" or "b") and 1 and 2. Consider
"a") Why would God annihilate someone he loves? You might say, "well, he simply ceases to give him existence." No matter. He stopped loving him at least to the point of giving him existence. What was THE CONDITION that Satan no longer "met" that led God to snuff him out? And, whatever the condition was, does it mean YOU don't believe in God's UNCONDITIONAL love?
"b") Eternal hell is endless suffering... suffering God could end, if only by annihilating the sufferers. If God loves those in hell, as shown by the mere fact that he continues to give them existence, how is he LOVING them? If there was HOPE of them repenting, if there was a PURPOSE to their suffering, THEN of course allowing the damned to suffer could easily be construed as loving. But THEN you'd be a universalist. If you agree that there state is HOPELESS, then how do you reconcile the endless pain of the damned compatible with God's love?
Think about it, and come back at me.
Greg
"The responsibility is with the chooser -- God is blameless." Plato, Republic, 10. | | Back to Top | | |
|
One Love
Registered Member
Date Joined Jan 2003
Total Posts : 13888
| Posted 8/6/2003 9:40 PM (GMT -6) | | For Doc: The Brazen Understudy’s Rebuttal
Thought about it. Came back. Ha. Easy stuff, Doc. Rested up yesterday, milord?  Missed ya.
Moving on…
What my thought says is this:
For whatever beings that exist, God’s continual governance that keeps them in existence is a form in which God’s unconditional love is expressed TO all existent beings IN their distinctiveness.
What you are attempting to imply is this:
God’s governance only continues as long as a being is loved. Thus, cessation of created existence is evidence of NOT being loved by God.
Not the same thing, Doc. This point has GOT to be hammered.
Need an example. Let’s say that I make the following claim:
My giving each of my kids an apple every day at 9 AM is a form in which my love is expressed to each of them.
Does this mean that to the extent that I DON’T give my kids an apple every day, I don’t love them? Does this mean that if I STOP giving them apples altogether, that I don’t love them? No on both counts. All that my statement says is that the giving apples to my kids is, to me, a VALID EXPRESSION of my love to them. That’s all.
Bringing it back. All that my statement about God’s gracious governance says is that, given my description of love, it is a VALID EXPRESSION of unconditional love to all sentient beings IN their distinctiveness. It fits all the markings. This is NOT the same thing as saying that to the extent that cessation of personal existence occurs, God doesn’t (or didn’t rather) love the annihilated being.
Going back to the apples example. If I would have said:
My giving my kids an apple every day at 9 AM is directly related to my loving them.
…then everything becomes different. OF COURSE as soon as I stop giving my kids apples, you know something’s wrong. Why? Because I’ve given the hint that to the extent I don’t give apples, I don’t love them.
Back again. If I’d have said that God’s sustanance of sentient beings was in DIRECT RELATIONSHIP to God’s love for them, then that would have been what you are talking about. But then for me to have claimed THIS would have naturally lead me to either 1) claim the NECESSARY eternal existence of all sentient beings in order to preserve God’s unconditional love or 2) give the possibility for annihilationism at the cost of saying God’s love is CONDITIONAL in some type of way. I saw this long time ago when I first talked to you about this, Doc.
Who would fall for such an mental tarpit?
Not me, dawg. This is why I was able to say this in an earlier post…
quote:
I would agree that:
--the RECEIVING of God’s love is conditional (by time limit of probationary period or self-soldification)
I took the open view and warfare worldview comsology that you lay out, Doc, and agreed with the idea of the ideas of the conscious RECEPTION of God’s love being conditional. Though God’s love was UNCONDITIONAL towards all, constraints within the view (ala probationary period expiration or self-solidification) would render this unconditionally given love CONDITIONALLY accepted from the receiver’s end. And until whatever happened (whether annihilation OR eternal punishment), God’s governance of sentient beings existences from moment to moment could be seen as God’s unconditional love being demonstrated TO all sentient beings IN their distinctiveness.
Because I don’t claim that God’s sustanance of sentient being is in DIRECT RELATIONSHIP to God’s love for them, I am able to be either an annihilationist, universalist, OR an eternal punishment person.
Actually, NOW, a person could be an annihilationist on firmer ground, I would think. I thought we talked about this, old bean.
*************************************
Doc:
quote:
Meph: We don't mourn for something that we are AGAINST, right?
Doc: Come on. Use your imagination. A loving kings son leads a rebellion against the king and his kingdom.
Hmm…
The loving king would MOURN for his son, given the upcoming conflict against and possible death of his son…because the king LOVES his son.
What is the King TRULY against? REBELLION. REBELLION and INSURRECTION. These things, the king doesn’t mourn at all and would rather them be extinguished.
To the extent that anyone PARTICIPATES in rebellion or insurrection, they are tying their lots in with these condemned practices. To the extent that the Son PARTICIPATES in rebellion and insurrection, the King, if just, must deal with the son in due order. Though the king will defend his crown vigorously against his upstart, rebellious son even to the bloody death of the same, the king will do so SOBERLY, MOURNFULLY, possibly even angrily. Why? Because...
The King LOVES the son, but HATES the rebellion and insurrection that the Son has become mired in.
In LIKE manner, God LOVES sentient being, but HATES the sin that any of them, including Satan, get mired in.
I know this ain’t that hard to get. And you’re a genius!
"I've been converted three times. The first was to traditional Christianity; the second to honesty and the third was to the Love of God and man (humanity) The third was the real conversion. The first two were preliminary."
--Nels Ferre, a theologian speaking of his spiritual journey with the Triune God
| | Back to Top | | |
|
trosie
Registered Member
Date Joined Jul 2001
Total Posts : 550
| Posted 8/7/2003 2:39 AM (GMT -6) | | Starkmanquote:
Figure it this way ... that God (agape) "loves" someone, anyone, is to say that God never changes in His character; He will always act rationally, respectfully and judiciously, etc. There's never going to be a time when God is spiteful, irrational, hateful or anything like that. So to say that God "loves" everyone, including Satan, is only to say that it is within the character of God to always demonstrate those unchanging characteristics God possess.
Part of God's character, as depicted in the bible, is characterized as one in which His reaction is based upon our action. Several times throughout scripture we see verses as: "If my people... THEN I will..." I think this demonstrates that within God's character there is a part that changes depending upon his children's actions. There have been times that God even has stated that he hates wickedness. Satan is the perfect persona of pure and thorough wickedness.
Perhaps a better way to describe God's love is to say that God's love is PERFECT instead of saying God's love is UNCONDITIONAL.
| | Back to Top | | |
|
might-be-don
Registered Member
Date Joined Jun 2001
Total Posts : 830
| Posted 8/7/2003 3:33 AM (GMT -6) | | Riddle me this Batman...
(1) I sin because I am a sinner.
(2) I'm a sinner because I sin.
(3) I'm not a sinner, I just do sin.
It seems you'all are saying #3.
Maybe I can say it like this... God created us and said, "Goody" . You seem to say that God loves that "goody" piece that still survives, I say that "goody" piece is GONE. You cannot seperate "me" from my sin, I own it, I've made it mine.
That's what makes God's love so utterly amazing, "while we were yet sinners". Sinners, that is our core being. Until of course, we are transformed. Yeah!
peace, don
"Life is a gift from God, but the years have weight in them."
Terry Scott Taylor | | Back to Top | | |
|
Starkman
Registered Member
Date Joined Oct 2001
Total Posts : 1747
| Posted 8/7/2003 4:38 AM (GMT -6) | | Hey Trosie,
quote:
Part of God's character, as depicted in the bible, is characterized as one in which His reaction is based upon our action. Several times throughout scripture we see verses as: "If my people... THEN I will..." I think this demonstrates that within God's character there is a part that changes depending upon his children's actions.
We need to be carefull here, though I see where you're going. I'd only say that the framework of God's character never changes; Who God is--fair, rational, just, etc.--, is constant. However, in that His actions change in accordance with our actions is not to say that His character changes; indeed, to be fair, rational and just, there must be flexibility in the presentation of these characteristics: one cannot be fair if the exact same treatment is given to all.
quote:
There have been times that God even has stated that he hates wickedness. Satan is the perfect persona of pure and thorough wickedness.
Yes, God does hate wickedness, but let's be clear about what wickedness is. Satan is not the ontology of wickedness; one cannot point to Satan and say, "Hey, look, there's wickedness," as if wickedness is some sort of thing. Satan is a being who will be treated no less fair and just than anyone else. He, however, is very wicked in what he does, and his wickedness stems from a reference point, as does all wickedness: God's eternal character, which we know is just, fair, righteous, etc. That Satan has departed from this character than anyone else is one thing; that Satan can be said to be the "personification" of wickedness might be too close to saying he is ontological wickedness and evil. So, God can hate wickedness, and hate what someone has become, but that's fully in accordance within the flexibility His unchangable character allows.
quote:
Perhaps a better way to describe God's love is to say that God's love is PERFECT instead of saying God's love is UNCONDITIONAL.
Hmm! Now here I'm incline to agree with you; however, I don't recall saying that God's love is unconditional (maybe you weren't implying that I had said this). I feel that we really need to first understand God's unchangable (perfect) character and then we can understand something about "love," which derives from this character. It is when we make the two issues one in the same that I think makes "defining" love so hard. First, God's character; second, how God will (agape) love in view of who and what God's character is. So, yeah, I think you say it well: God's love is perfect. Truly!
For better understandng love,
Starkman | | Back to Top | | |
| 148 posts in this thread.
Viewing Page : 1 2 3 4 5 6 |
| Forum Information | Currently it is Monday, November 09, 2026 6:03 PM (GMT -6)
There are a total of 97,718 posts in 6,040 threads.
In the last 3 days there were 0 new threads and 0 reply posts. View Active Threads
|
Forum powered by dotNetBB v2.42EC SP3
dotNetBB © 2000-2026 |
|
|