A platitude: god is love

[Saint Frankenstein]

Maybe they meant to say something else? I need a translator Christian -> English.

Apparently you're fairly unfamiliar with Christianity.

 

[Heyo]

Apparently you're fairly unfamiliar with Christianity.

Been a member of that club for about 20 years but even then I didn't really got the knack of that language.

 

[Koldo]

It's from the Bible:
"7 Beloved, let us love one another, for love is from God, and whoever loves has been born of God and knows God. 8 Anyone who does not love does not know God, because God is love." 1 John 4:7-8

Bible Gateway passage: 1 John 4 - English Standard Version

Test the Spirits - Beloved, do not believe every spirit, but test the spirits to see whether they are from God, for many false prophets have gone out into the world. By this you know the Spirit of God: every spirit that confesses that Jesus Christ has come in the flesh is from God, and every...

www.biblegateway.com

It's a way of saying that the ultimate reality and action of God is of love, and by acts of love, we participate in that reality. I'm not a theologian and others can explain that better.

Which either entails ignoring most of the bible or having a very weird understanding of what love is.

The simplest solution is that someone can both be loving in one moment and wrathful in another.

 

[Saint Frankenstein]

Been a member of that club for about 20 years but even then I didn't really got the knack of that language.

I can understand, Paul is getting somewhat mystical there.

 

[Trailblazer]

The post immediately underneath yours and above mine is consistent with that.

Yes, I just saw that post. See, I was right.

I just left this on another thread:

He: "Christ had the most to say about hell than anyone as He lovingly warned about it."

Me: This gets us back to the Christian concept of love. Here, love is building a torture pit, stocking it full of demons and fire, and tossing people into it after "lovingly" instructing them to comply with assorted commandments or else. "Why did you force me to hurt you?" asks the abusive boyfriend and this god. I'm also shocked at what passes for love in, "Love the sinner, hate the sin," which manifests as hating the sinner. Also, depicting a blood sacrifice as an act of love is pretty off-putting as well.

That's not your theology as I understand it. Your understanding of love seems to comport more with mine than the Christian version. Can you expand on why you say what you said above? Are you saying that God is unloving or that a loving god is not the same as love. After all, we can love people and animals, but we don't equate ourselves with love. We can also hate and be indifferent, just like the god of Abraham, who is said to hate sin and who once allegedly hardened Pharaoh's heart.

I said: "There certainly is no evidence that indicates God is love, quite the contrary."

A loving God is not the same as God being love. It makes no sense to say that God is love, even if God is loving.
Christians say that God is love, and I guess that is in the Bible, but Baha'u'llah wrote that God is All-Loving, that being 'one attribute' of God.

I am saying that there is no evidence that God is loving, and there are reasons to believe that God is unloving, if we look at the suffering in this world, of humans and animals. It is not that God allows it, it is that God created such a world on the first place. Suffering is a built in feature of this world so there would be no reason for God to rescue us from the suffering that he intended for us to experience by creating the world this way.

God may very well be loving, but I cannot believe that based merely on scriptures. I need some kind of evidence. Till I get that evidence I reserve judgment.

It really does not matter to me if God is loving since that is just a belief that some people hold, nothing that could ever be proven.
What difference would it make if God is loving? It certainly would not mean that God is going to show that love as a person or animal could, so why does it matter so much to people?

 

[Trailblazer]

It's not a platitude when you've experienced God and felt that love.

But what if you haven't? Why would it be your fault, given you were open to experiencing it?

 

[Hermit Philosopher]

Platitude
a remark or statement, especially one with a moral content, that has been used too often to be interesting or thoughtful.

The statement “God is love”... is it a platitude?

A couple years ago, as a earnest theist, I made a thread on the topic of God is love. It very much was not a platitude for me at the time.

God is (Is God) Love. (?)

A reply I saw earlier raised some good points. I'm very sensitive to cognitivity: there are some theistic claims that I'm just not sure are even saying anything at all, like "God is love." I understand what "God is loving" would mean, because it's saying God has a property. But "God is love" is...

www.religiousforums.com

I wonder now if the phrase “God is love” is a platitude. My previous explanation of the idea of God being love still makes sense to me I guess. But, I have seen it said often “God is love”, even on this site.

”God is love”. Has that phrase lost its meaning? Did it have any meaning in the first place? Does God even deserve a monopoly on the idea of love? I certainly can’t say “humans are love” because humans are utter barbarians.

Is the statement just something we say because it sounds nice?

Oh, and what other religious platitudes are there?

At risk of getting into different definitions of omniscience, I’d say that if we by “love” mean a selfless will to understand another, then I believe that God could be understood as love.

Humbly,
Hermit

 

[Koldo]

I can understand, Paul is getting somewhat mystical there.

Are you saying that Paul is the author of 1 John?

 

[Trailblazer]

At risk of getting into different definitions of omniscience, I’d say that if we by “love” mean a selfless will to understand another, then I believe that God could be understood as love.

Humbly,
Hermit

Can you explain how God has a selfless will to understand another?

 

[Saint Frankenstein]

But what if you haven't? Why would it be your fault, given you were open to experiencing it?

There may be something going on with you that's inhabiting you from recognizing it. Do you pray?

 

[Trailblazer]

There may be something going on with you that's inhabiting you from recognizing it.

That may well be true, given I don't love God.

5: O SON OF BEING! Love Me, that I may love thee. If thou lovest Me not, My love can in no wise reach thee. Know this, O servant.
The Hidden Words of Bahá’u’lláh, p. 4

Do you pray?

Yes, but usually only for assistance with tests and difficulties, not to be closer to God.

 

[Sand Dancer]

Probably a platitude. God is love, but if we talk about the Hebrew god, then he is many other things that are not loving or lovely.

 

[Valjean]

"Love" can't be universally substituted for "God" without the original meaning of the sentence being altered. Therefore, it's not a synonym.

 

[idea]

I sort of assumed that being Chinese would
be a tip that i'm not likely to be Chridtian.

But to avoid awkwardness I memorized a
saying if asked to say grace.

I did need it once.

" Sanctify, oh Lord, this to our use and us to thy
purpose. Amen"

I wonder if I could get away with just "Amen" at the end instead of "in the name if Jesus Christ, Amen". Will have to try it.

 

[Audie]

I wonder if I could get away with just "Amen" at the end instead of "in the name if Jesus Christ, Amen". Will have to try it.

That will tell you a lot about the people you
associate with.

 

[Evangelicalhumanist]

Platitude
a remark or statement, especially one with a moral content, that has been used too often to be interesting or thoughtful.

The statement “God is love”... is it a platitude?

A couple years ago, as a earnest theist, I made a thread on the topic of God is love. It very much was not a platitude for me at the time.

God is (Is God) Love. (?)

A reply I saw earlier raised some good points. I'm very sensitive to cognitivity: there are some theistic claims that I'm just not sure are even saying anything at all, like "God is love." I understand what "God is loving" would mean, because it's saying God has a property. But "God is love" is...

www.religiousforums.com

I wonder now if the phrase “God is love” is a platitude. My previous explanation of the idea of God being love still makes sense to me I guess. But, I have seen it said often “God is love”, even on this site.

”God is love”. Has that phrase lost its meaning? Did it have any meaning in the first place? Does God even deserve a monopoly on the idea of love? I certainly can’t say “humans are love” because humans are utter barbarians.

Is the statement just something we say because it sounds nice?

Oh, and what other religious platitudes are there?

I rather think the phrase is more of a deepity. A deepity is

“A statement that is apparently profound but actually asserts a triviality on one level and something meaningless on another. Generally, a deepity has (at least) two meanings: one that is true but trivial, and another that sounds profound, but is essentially false or meaningless and would be “earth-shattering” if true.”​

So, “God is love” appeals to emotions, and so it seems to make some real sense to a lot of people. But it is still a deepity, because:

• It is false on the face of it - God cannot be reduced to an emotion
• Looking deeper, you cannot, by any stretch of the imagination, call the God of the Bible, who would burn and drown people, and give his own followers plagues for any rule-infringement, "Love."

 

[Trailblazer]

Looking deeper, you cannot, by any stretch of the imagination, call the God of the Bible, who would burn and drown people, and give his own followers plagues for any rule-infringement, "Love."

There is no "God of the Bible." There is just God.
The Old Testament is just stories about God, anthropomorpisms.

 

[Evangelicalhumanist]

There is no "God of the Bible." There is just God.
The Old Testament is just stories about God, anthropomorpisms.

That may or (in my view more likely) may not be true. It doesn't change the fact that a significant percentage of earth's human inhabitants know only the God of the Torah/Bible, or the Qur'an, or the Granth Guru Sahib, or other such anthroporphisms. If you're trying to make a case, you apparently still have most of your work ahead of you.

 

[Trailblazer]

That may or (in my view more likely) may not be true. It doesn't change the fact that a significant percentage of earth's human inhabitants know only the God of the Torah/Bible, or the Qur'an, or the Granth Guru Sahib, or other such anthroporphisms. If you're trying to make a case, you apparently still have most of your work ahead of you.

My case is that it doesn't matter what people believe or how many people believe it, since that is no indication of what is true.
All I care about is what is actually true. If a significant percentage of earth's human inhabitants anthropomorphize God that is no reason to conclude that God is like a man, as depicted in many scriptures.

In argumentation theory, an argumentum ad populum (Latin for "appeal to the people") is a fallacious argument that concludes that a proposition is true because many or most people believe it: "If many believe so, it is so."

This type of argument is known by several names,[1] including appeal to the masses, appeal to belief, appeal to the majority, appeal to democracy, appeal to popularity, argument by consensus, consensus fallacy, authority of the many, bandwagon fallacy,
Argumentum ad populum - Wikipedia

 

[Evangelicalhumanist]

My case is that it doesn't matter what people believe or how many people believe it, since that is no indication of what is true.
All I care about is what is actually true. If a significant percentage of earth's human inhabitants anthropomorphize God that is no reason to conclude that God is like a man, as depicted in many scriptures.

In argumentation theory, an argumentum ad populum (Latin for "appeal to the people") is a fallacious argument that concludes that a proposition is true because many or most people believe it: "If many believe so, it is so."

This type of argument is known by several names,[1] including appeal to the masses, appeal to belief, appeal to the majority, appeal to democracy, appeal to popularity, argument by consensus, consensus fallacy, authority of the many, bandwagon fallacy,
Argumentum ad populum - Wikipedia

Well, you've pulled up all the weaponry! But I am going to focus only on this one sentence: "All I care about is what is actually true." And nothing that you have said here, or in 40,000+ other posts, actually makes any case at all for "what is actually true." Only for what you think it might be.

Through this whole dialogue, that has been my only point.