How much does the Christian God really love us?

[look3467]

You know, if you accept something on faith only, then - by definition - what you accept is unsubstantiated.>>>Enoughie

Hence...... faith in something unseen, yet placing faith in.

A choice based on wanting to.

An unbeliever - someone who does not believe in Christ - is not the same as someone who claims that a God does not exist. These are two separate (and at times mutually exclusive) things.

Yes, of course, but faith in Christ is believing that Jesus and God are one and the same but in different administrations.

And if there is no belief in Christ, then God does not exist, in my thinking.

..."all the evidence we have in the world (biology, geology, cosmology, etc.) point to processes that contradict the Biblical accounts. This means that the Biblical claims are highly improbable.. err.. nearly impossible"

There again, one must want to have faith in a God of creation, otherwise is as you say.

Also, there's no reason to think that even if a God exists that God = Jesus. There's also no reason to think that if God exists it has the characteristics that men attributed to it (saying "to him" is already a characteristic men attribute to God).

Again, if one does not believe that Jesus = God, then there no reason to believe in the bible account of Him.

Mankind can attribute any conceivable characteristic to a god, God that the mind can imagine.

What matters is that God attributes to mankind His characteristics, as in His image.

There is no disputing that fact for the simple reason that mankind can reason, think, and make judgments as gods.

There is no great mystery, either one believes in God or one does not.

Blessings, AJ

 

[Enoughie]

Yes, of course, but faith in Christ is believing that Jesus and God are one and the same but in different administrations.

And if there is no belief in Christ, then God does not exist, in my thinking.

Are you saying that it's either that there is a God, and Jesus Christ is that God, or there is no God at all?

There is no other option?

For example, that there is a God, but that God is not Jesus Christ? That it is actually Allah, or Zeus, or a God that no religion recognized?

_____________________
Geopolitics.us - Natural Philosophy of Life - a simple, elegant, and powerful alternative to religious dogma

 

[look3467]

How could god make us ignorant and expect us to correctly choose in the maze of religions the correct path to god?>>>AntEmpire

This world is our school teacher. God gives us the ability to think, reason and make judgments concerning things that are good for us and things that are not while we learn.

A Godly conscience we all have whether we admit it or not, for it is in the conscience that enables us to make judgments pro or con.
Is a baby born with an adult mind, or ignorant to its environment?
Can a baby have the experience of life via the trials and tribulations?

No! We must choose for ourselves, with whatever information we have, the means by which we choose to believe, and the experiences of life to shape those beliefs.

Oh but he left us a giant vague book? How is man supposed to know this book is the book to base his life on? Because his parents did? And what if they didn't?

Look around, see how that book affects their lives, and if it seems good to you, then it must be worth the investigation.

There allot of folk whose lives have been changes for the good.....those I would question and perhaps, it might be good for you to.

To me it makes no sense for someone as smart as god to do something so dumb as to expect anything of man without giving us to work with besides books that were made by man.

It would be fitting for me to give you this illustration using the Ant.

If I,...... say were God, and wanted to communicate with the ant colony, how would I go about it?

Well, if I would become an ant, I could communicate as an ant to the ant colony.

I could tell them all about the Father Ant and how much He loves them.

And because I became an ant, having the righteousness of God and not of mere man, I would then offer myself as a sacrifice for all the ants, so that they would not be lost eternally as it were, had I not offered myself in the place.

You see, what I said was no biblical story, but one which I used to illustrate who, what God is and how He came to reveal Himself to us via one like ourselves.

I would give it a better looking into with boldness, for God would favor you in trying.

Blessings, AJ

 

[look3467]

Are you saying that it's either that there is a God, and Jesus Christ is that God, or there is no God at all?>>>Enoughie

I am saying that there is a God, and Jesus came to reveal Him to us as God, as like in the ant story I just gave.

There is no other option?

The option is, believe in God or not. That's a matter of your personal choice.

For example, that there is a God, but that God is not Jesus Christ? That it is actually Allah, or Zeus, or a God that no religion recognized?

In the bible, Jesus is the Son of God, while all the others are as like you and I, born of the spirit of Adam and in need to be reborn of the spirit of God in order to have life everlasting.

Blessings, AJ

 

[Enoughie]

The option is, believe in God or not. That's a matter of your personal choice.

OK. In that case, can I believe in God, but not believe any of the attributes that Jesus ascribed to God?

Can I believe in God and not believe in heaven or hell, or in life after death?

Can I believe in God and think that Jesus is a false God?

It's not exactly a binary choice (believe in God or not) as you put it.

_____________________
Geopolitics.us - Natural Philosophy of Life - a simple, elegant, and powerful alternative to religious dogma

 

[Enoughie]

It would be fitting for me to give you this illustration using the Ant.

If I,...... say were God, and wanted to communicate with the ant colony, how would I go about it?

Well, if I would become an ant, I could communicate as an ant to the ant colony.

I could tell them all about the Father Ant and how much He loves them.

And because I became an ant, having the righteousness of God and not of mere man, I would then offer myself as a sacrifice for all the ants, so that they would not be lost eternally as it were, had I not offered myself in the place.

You see, what I said was no biblical story, but one which I used to illustrate who, what God is and how He came to reveal Himself to us via one like ourselves.

Yes, but you see, ants have not evolved the cognitive capabilities to understand any of the concepts that this Jesus-Ant-God would preach.

If such an ant would go through the motions that Jesus went through, only in an "anty" kind of way it would be absolutely meaningless to ants, and they would just keep going around doing what ants do.

Though ant colonies seem very complex, ants communicate at a very crude level, through chemical interactions. By crude I mean they can only understand a very limited number of "signs" which help them survive.

Ants don't ask themselves "what is the meaning of life?" because they have not evolved consciousness and don't have an area in the brain (like we do) that tries to make sense of the world.

And by trying to make sense of the world I don't mean actually looking for the truth. Just looking for an answer - any answer, even the wrong answer. And this process worked just fine for tens of thousands of years. But now that we know - through science - that some answers are wrong, some of us are actually trying to find better answers.

But back to the ant colony story: even if ants had that area in their brain they would lose it through evolution, since they have no evolutionary need for it.

Ants don't believe in God. They don't accept Jesus Christ as their savior, and they don't believe that they'll have everlasting life. They have no use for a God. Their life is just fine without belief in God or an afterlife.

Ants are agnostic. They neither think there is a God, or that there isn't one. And you know what? That's the most natural thing to do - to be agnostic.

So does that mean all ants go to hell?

That would be a shame, since at this moment there's really no way your God can communicate with them (if the only meaningful way your God can relate to living beings is through some process at the end of which he kills himself)

_____________________
Geopolitics.us - Natural Philosophy of Life - a simple, elegant, and powerful alternative to religious dogma

 

[Blackdog22]

I agee with most of your statement.

only thing i can find at fault is that love is not always two ways. many times love is one way and religion proves that. You have 1 person who loves an imaginary charactor in my opinion. Never recieving anything back.

love and religion work but in a very sad way.

Aye, I agree. I was meaning the idea of love, whether recieved on both ends or not, is a term generally agreed to mean something similiar amongst individuals; whereas religion is not.

But yeah, the one way road that religion takes people down has made me feel sorry
for other people many, many times. I think the cancer patient who keeps believing with their mouth, while doubt and sadness fills their eyes is something that I won't soon forget. When people are dying in such a way the doubt is so strong and the shattering of someones beliefs, whether spoken or not, is not an easy thing to watch.

EDIT @ LOOK3467: I appreciate your kind nature in your responses and will have to get back to you on your response to my earlier post. The way you put things makes it somewhat difficult to grasp for me personally so I will reread it.

 

[Numinous]

What does it really matter? We all die. If we love a certain way, so what? It means nothing after we die. If this God character loves another way, than at least it is eternal. I dunno, it is like comparing apples and oranges...

 

[wordmagnifiedabovenames]

But is the love of the Christian God unconditional? No. God's love is conditional. The New Testament tells us:
"For the Father Himself loves you, because you have loved Me and have believed that I came forth from the Father" (John 16:27)

The word used for love there does not mean "unconditional love," it more refers to friendship. A slightly more literal translation of the verse would be "The Father is friends with you (disciples) because you're friends with me (Jesus)..."

John 3:16 still says that God (unconditionally) loved the world.

 

[Enoughie]

The word used for love there does not mean "unconditional love," it more refers to friendship. A slightly more literal translation of the verse would be "The Father is friends with you (disciples) because you're friends with me (Jesus)..."

John 3:16 still says that God (unconditionally) loved the world.

Almost all translations say: "love." One translation says: "has affection for." None say "friendship"

John 16:27 No, the Father himself loves you because you have loved me and have believed that I came from God.

How can you tell if John 3:16 ("For God so loved the world that he gave his one and only Son, that whoever believes in him shall not perish but have eternal life") refers to unconditional love?

That verse (John 3:16) has serious theological problems with it, by the way.

_____________________
Geopolitics.us - Natural Philosophy of Life - a simple, elegant, and powerful alternative to religious dogma

 

[wordmagnifiedabovenames]

How can you tell if John 3:16.....refers to unconditional love?

By using a concordance and Greek dictionary.

 

[Enoughie]

By using a concordance and Greek dictionary.

Yes, I understand that. But the problem is that the meaning of the word is derived from the Bible itself. Which is basically using circular reasoning.

The Greek word "agape" does not in itself mean unconditional love. It could mean brotherly love, affection, OR unconditional love. It was quite an obscure word in Greek, except that it resembled the Hebrew word for love "ahava." Which is probably why it was chosen for the New Testament. But there again, "ahava" also doesn't mean unconditional love.

_____________________
Geopolitics.us - Natural Philosophy of Life - a simple, elegant, and powerful alternative to religious dogma

 

[wordmagnifiedabovenames]

But the problem is that the meaning of the word is derived from the Bible itself. Which is basically using circular reasoning.

Perhaps.... Still it's important to understand the author's meaning of the words used to correctly interpret what the author meant when he said it. In the case of the Bible, it means using God's definitions of words (if the Bible is indeed the word of God,) which means using the Bible to define the Bible. That can be said to be circular reasoning, but isn't it true of all texts? In order to correctly interpret a text the way the author intended it, the reader needs to first understand what the author means when he uses certain words or phrases. If the reader makes up his own definitions and doesn't understand the author's intention of using certain words in certain contexts, the reader will have misinterpreted what the author was trying to convey.
A famous biblical example of this is in Mark 8. The disciples and Jesus were in a boat, and Jesus told the disciples to beware the leaven of the Pharisees and of the leaven of Herod (and the leaven of the Sadducees in another account.) The disciples decided He was talking about them not having brought along enough bread for their boat trip (it says that they "reasoned among themselves," instead of asking the person who had said it, even though He was sitting there with them.) Jesus then told them off and basically said if the disciples had remembered what Jesus had previously said about bread, they would have understood what He meant in this instance. Instead they had the wrong interpretation (which could have lead to them having the wrong application; ensuring an ample supply of bread before each boat trip,) and Jesus wasn't happy about it.

Leaving that aside and returning to the OP though, I don't think John 16:27 doesn't mean that God's "love" for His disciples (as opposed to un-believers) is conditional upon them "loving" Jesus, it just means that God's affection/friendship for His disciples is conditional upon their friendship/having affection for Jesus. If they're friends with Jesus then God is friends with them. If they are not friends with Jesus then God won't be friends with them.

...he loves us like a slave-master loves his slaves.

In keeping with that analogy, do you know of another slave master who went and got himself crucified (crowned with thorns, whipped, made to carry the cross while being spat upon by his slaves and other people who he knew would become his slaves later etc.) one of the reasons being so that his slaves wouldn't have to spend forever burning in a lake of fire? I'd think that serving God as a "slave-master" would be a considerably different experience to serving someone called a "slave-master" by today's standards.
Like Mark 8, this is an example of needing to understand what God means when He uses certain phrases ("slaves to God,") as opposed to what we think those phrases mean today to correctly interpret what He's saying.

 

[horiturk]

from the actions in the OT i'd say he only loves himself

 

[Christian Gnosis]

How much the Biblical god loves non-Jews:

Deuteronomy 20:16-18 “You shall not leave alive anything that breathes. But you shall utterly destroy them: the Hittite and the Amorite, the Canaanite and the Perizzite, the Hivite and the Jebusite, as the Lord your God has commanded you, so that they may not teach you to do according to all their detestable things which they have done for their gods, so that you would sin against the Lord your God”

 

[look3467]

..." I understand that. But the problem is that the meaning of the word is derived from the Bible itself. Which is basically using circular reasoning".

The Greek word "agape" does not in itself mean unconditional love. It could mean brotherly love, affection, OR unconditional love. It was quite an obscure word in Greek, except that it resembled the Hebrew word for love "ahava." Which is probably why it was chosen for the New Testament. But there again, "ahava" also doesn't mean unconditional love.

In order to understand the work of God in behalf of humanity, we have to look at the whole picture and not bits and pieces in attempt to arrive at a conclusion.

There are four steps written for mankind to achieve in this live.
1. Introduction or being born.
2. The fall or coming to the knowledge of being less then perfect.
3. The judgment or the penalty for gaining such knowledge
4. The execution or the casting out of the garden. (Death)

These four apply to every human being regardless of religious or non-religious beliefs.

Now, here is the picture in whole: God created mankind short of His glory subjecting humanity to vanity of this world in order to be tried, and by the same token, He also subjected humanity to hope of salvation from all of it.

God's love for His own creation is unconditional in that He requires humanity nothing in return for saving humanity.

That is the picture that should rather be seen in order to see what the real works of God are.

Now, the works of mankind are something else. For as gods, lower case g, we can just about do as we will to our feloow human beings being good or evil.

That does not bring judgment against God for that, but instead to mankind for God is not evil in any way shape or form, but mankind can be.

In these forums, there are always many arguments about objects (Issues) in the whole picture that are taken to mean whatever we deem the meaning to be.

If foe example we are putting a puzzle together without seeing the picture first on the carton, we can not tell what the finnished product is, but rather, we can make gusess along the way as to what we think the whole picture is.

Then again, we could be all wrong in our guesses.

The first Adam was created flesh and subjected to vanity.
The second Adam was of the first, subjected to vanity, except; was not born of the same spirit as the first Adam, but of God's spirit.

That makes Jesus as God, upper case G, shouldering the whole of humanity's sin.

That is the picture in whole.

Blessings, AJ

 

[Enoughie]

Perhaps.... Still it's important to understand the author's meaning of the words used to correctly interpret what the author meant when he said it.

Sure, and that it exactly the purpose of my OP. To discuss what the N.T. means when it says: "for God loved the world so much that.."

That is exactly my question, how much does the Christian God really love us?

In keeping with that analogy, do you know of another slave master who went and got himself crucified (crowned with thorns, whipped, made to carry the cross while being spat upon by his slaves and other people who he knew would become his slaves later etc.) one of the reasons being so that his slaves wouldn't have to spend forever burning in a lake of fire? I'd think that serving God as a "slave-master" would be a considerably different experience to serving someone called a "slave-master" by today's standards.
Like Mark 8, this is an example of needing to understand what God means when He uses certain phrases ("slaves to God,") as opposed to what we think those phrases mean today to correctly interpret what He's saying.

I'm not impressed at all. You see, if your 2-year-old son comes up to you and tells you he can count to 10, you'd be impressed. But if your 25-year-old son does the same, I'm sure you wouldn't think much of him.

If the biblical account is true (and obviously it isn't), then all God did is "fix" his own faulty design of the world through the crucifixion. Well, why would an all-powerful and all-knowing God be such a lousy designer? I don't see why I should be impressed by this spectacle.

And a spectacle it is! What is the meaning of death or suffering to an eternal God? It's meaningless. Much like a 25-year-old counting to 10, only infinitely less impressive.

God can make millions of Jesuses popping in an out of existence with great suffering. He's all-powerful. It is no challenge to him at all.

But there's a much darker side to this whole story. That is, the tyrannical system that God put in place through Jesus - the fact that poor souls will have to suffer to eternity in hell if they don't believe in Jesus. These are the true martyrs. Not Jesus.

Jesus may have suffered for some hours, but these souls will suffer to eternity. And why? Because they dare to use one of the most marvelous apparatus that God supposedly designed - their brain. Since there's no real evidence to believe in Jesus, and they are told to abandon reason and follow him, they can either choose to be hypocrites and deserve heaven, or be righteous and go to hell. And that is the meaning of tyranny.

The short suffering of an all-powerful and eternal God is nothing in comparison to daily suffering of his slaves, and the eternal suffering of those who choose freedom.

But, on the bright side, it's good to know that none of it is actually true. So we can rejoice at that.

_____________________
Geopolitics.us - Natural Philosophy of Life - a simple, elegant, and powerful alternative to religious dogma

 

[Enoughie]

There are four steps written for mankind to achieve in this live.
1. Introduction or being born.
2. The fall or coming to the knowledge of being less then perfect.
3. The judgment or the penalty for gaining such knowledge
4. The execution or the casting out of the garden. (Death)

These four apply to every human being regardless of religious or non-religious beliefs.

Not really. These four exclusively apply to those who choose to believe in these myths and frame their understanding of the world accordingly.

The rest of humanity either believes in other myths, or tries to recognize reality as it is and live a decent live.

God's love for His own creation is unconditional in that He requires humanity nothing in return for saving humanity.

Nothing in return? I thought we need to abandon our reasoning faculties (and morals) and follow the medieval rules Jesus set for us? That's not exactly "nothing."

_____________________
Geopolitics.us - Natural Philosophy of Life - a simple, elegant, and powerful alternative to religious dogma

 

[jtartar]

We are constantly reminded by devout Christians that their God has immense love for all his creation, and that we should believe in this God.


So how much does the Christian God really love us?


We can compare the love of the Christian God to the love of a good parent. A good parent would want his children to be righteous and successful. A good parent's love for his children is unconditional.


But is the love of the Christian God unconditional? No. God's love is conditional. The New Testament tells us:

"For the Father Himself loves you, because you have loved Me and have believed that I came forth from the Father" (John 16:27)
​

In other words, the Christian God's love for us is conditional on our belief in Jesus and us obeying his orders. And if we don't believe and obey? Then the Christian God will have the most horrible things happen to us:

"Their place will be in the lake that burns with fire and sulfur" (Revelation 21:8)
​

Is this how a good parent would treat his children? Would you want your child tortured for eternity if she disobeys your unreasonable demands? Of course not. A good parent would do everything in his power to help his children.


But does the Christian God do everything in his power to help his children? Not even close. After all, the Christian God is supposedly all-powerful. He could surely do much more to help the poor, the diseased, or the starving.


Would a loving parent purposefully make his children sick? The Christian God creates us sick and commands us to be well. And then, he would only grant us eternal life (something that should be incredible easy to do for an all-powerful God) on the condition that we become enslaved to him!

"But now that you have been set free from sin and have become slaves to God, the benefit you reap leads to holiness, and the result is eternal life" (Romans 6:22)
​

Remember, this is supposedly an all-powerful and loving God! Can't he grant everyone eternal life, unconditionally?!


So how much does the Christian God really love us? Apparently the Christian God does not really love us that much after all. His love cannot possibly be compared to the unconditional love of a parent. And he wouldn't do everything in his power to help his children. But he would do the most horrible things to children who disobey him.


The Christian God does not love us like a parent loves his children, he loves us like a slave-master loves his slaves.


_____________________

Geopolitics.us - Natural Philosophy of Life - a simple, elegant, and powerful alternative to religious dogma

Enoughie,
What you say does hold a bit of logic, but your logic is from a standpoint of NOT knowing the PURPOSE of God.
Does God love His creation??? Well you asked the question about a parent. Most parents will die for their children. Think though, if that parent had the power he would stop the death, both for himself and the child. Parents actually feel more pain over the death of a child than over their own death.
Then reason on what God did for mankind. God sent His ONLYBEGOTTEN SON to earth to give his life for us, Matt 20:28, John 1:18. Theologians have even named the pain that God endured at the death and suffering of His son, Patripassionism, that God suffered just as Jesus did. Could you do that for someone you did not care about. God does care about people, 1Pet 5:6,7, Gal 2:20, Rom 5:5-9.
Something else to reason on: God obeys His own laws. When Adam and Eve decided to obey Satan instead of God they became sinners. Because of sin they were no longer perfect, they then had a defect, that would eventually lead to their death, along with their progeny. Adam was a perfect man, so no other man on earth could provede a ransom for Adam's sin and remove the defect, Ps 49:6-10. Since no man could ransom men from sin and death mankind had no hope. God put the life of His dear son into a woman on earth, Mary, and Jesus became a man, so that he, a perfect man could give a CORRESPONDING RANSOM for mankind, giving a perfect life for the perfect life that Adam lost for mankind, 1Tim 2:4-6, Rom 5:14, 1Cor 15:44-47, Heb 4:15.
How could anyone ask the question: Does God care about mankind???
Now, let us discuss the peobles we have on earth.
It is reasonable to blame the terrible conditions on God because He is Almighty, He has the power to correct all wrongs. BUT, wait a minute, when Adam and Eve decided to rebell against God and since they did not want Him to be their God, He allowed Satan to become their God and the RULER of the WORLD, John 12:31, 14:30, 16:11, Consider also what Paul and John said, 2Cor 4:3,4, 1John 5:19, Rev 12:9. When Satan was contending with Jesus just after Jesus was in the wilderness for forty days and nights, Satan offered the World and all the Kingdoms to Jesus for just one act of worship, because they had all been given to Satan. Jesus did nt disagree with Satan about the owner of the world, but said to only give God our sacred service.
So then; It is Satan that is the cause of the conditions of this world, and it is the GOD of the Bible who has promised to correct all the things that Satan has helped to ruin, and make this world a paradise, with people living forever in perfect happiness, Rev 21:3,4, Luke 23:43, Isa 11:1-9.
For many years there was a Theocracy on this earth, God actually ruling over His people Israel. Because they continued to turn away from Him and worship all kinds of gods, He allowed the Babylonians to destroy Jerusalem and the Great Temple that Solomon had built, which was the symbol that God was with His people. This destruction happened in 607BC. At that time the start of a countdown toward the time when again someone would sit on the throne of the Theocracy. That time period we are told, was 2,520 years. The time period climaxed in 1914, when Jesus began sitting on the Throne of God's Kingdom. Jesus is to rule in the midst of his enemies for a period, and then take full control of the earth, Ps 110:1,2, 1Cor 15:23, and Rev 6:2-8 shows when Jesus would start riding to complete his conquest, right along with the other of The Four Horses of the Apocalipse.
We are living on the very threshold of the New Earth, The Judgement Day of 1,000 years, Rev 21:3,4, 20:4-10.
God has given more than enough time to find Him and obey His commandments. He does not want to destroy anyone, but He is forced to remove all ones who do not want to obey, 2Pet 3:3-7, 9,10,15.
The only possible way to bring this world to a paradise is to remove those who will not obey. How otherwise can God judge the world??? Rom 3:5,6.

 

[Blackdog22]

Nothing in return? I thought we need to abandon our reasoning faculties (and morals) and follow the medieval rules Jesus set for us? That's not exactly "nothing

I would like to back this statement up with Biblical verses. There are 7 (actually more, but ill keep it simple) rules Jesus gives us in the New Testament alone that we have to follow, and most Christians seem to ignore these rules while going for the, "You only have to belief," falsity.

Rule # 1

Love the Lord God With All Your Heart, All Your Soul, and All Your Mind; And Love Your Neighbor As Yourself.

Rule # 2

Do Not Commit Adultry, Do Not Steal, Do Not Murder, Do Not Give False Testimony and Honor Your Father and Mother.

Rule # 3

Sell Everything You Own and Give It To The Poor, and Earn Treasure In Heaven and Follow Only Jesus.

Rule # 4

Jesus says, " If Anyone Comes To Me and Does Not Hate His Father and Mother, His Wife and Children, His Brother and Sister, Yes, Even His Own Life, He Cannot Be My Disciple. In The Same Way, Any Of You Who Does Not Give Up Everything You Have Cannot Be My Disciple."

Rule # 5

Unless You Change and Become Like Little Children You Can Never Enter The Kingdom Of Heaven.

Rule # 6

Jesus says, " I tell You The Truth Noone Can Enter The Kingdom Of God Unless He is Born Again."

Rule # 7

Believe In Jesus' Name That He Died For Your Sins.

This of course doesn't even count the 613 Laws in the Old Testament that Jesus said had to be followed.

So, have fun trying to get into Heaven everyone.