Lol. I nominate this for the thread title of the year. Award ceremony next February. But if the Divine Creator is crushing on us, wouldn’t that be better than living alone in an empty universe? Plus, think of the swag you’d get having a supernatural honey. :halo:Does Jesus/Yahweh love us or is he stalking us? — Gnostic Christian Bishop
Does Jesus/Yahweh love us or is he stalking us? — Gnostic Christian Bishop
Love without reciprocity, works and deeds, according to scriptures and Jesus’ own words, not that a supernatural Jesus ever existed, is not a true love.
All you need to do, to know the truth of that notion; is to look at your own standards of love. You would not love someone who does not return that love, as that is more a stalkers kind of love.
Some Christians and other believers will not see that. Most who are not led by faith, generally accept the truth stated above.
This link, in its message, gives about the same notion.
http://imgur.com/a/CIce4
Your thoughts? — Gnostic Christian Bishop
You would not love someone who does not return that love, as that is more a stalkers kind of love. — Gnostic Christian Bishop
Love without reciprocity, works and deeds, according to scriptures and Jesus’ own words, not that a supernatural Jesus ever existed, is not a true love.
All you need to do, to know the truth of that notion; is to look at your own standards of love. You would not love someone who does not return that love, as that is more a stalkers kind of love. — Gnostic Christian Bishop
Your answer is yes. He does bothDoes Jesus/Yahweh love us or is he stalking us?
So when you say, for instance, that you love your dog, are you really putting your dog above yourself, or are you loving the dog as a possession, a pet and a loyal companion? If your dog suddenly turned on you, would you continue to love it - putting it above yourself - or would you determine that it no longer fulfilled your narrow view of its potential?
Lol. I nominate this for the thread title of the year. Award ceremony next February. But if the Divine Creator is crushing on us, wouldn’t that be better than living alone in an empty universe? Plus, think of the swag you’d get having a supernatural honey. :halo: — 0 thru 9
They're fictional characters, — S
My thoughts are that love can quite obviously be unreciprocated without being stalking, — S
You can love someone who has the capacity or potential to love. You can love someone who despises you , because you know he doesn't understand you. You can loved someone for their attributes, even if they don't love or even know you. — Joshs
I’m curious as to what is your understanding of ‘a true love’? What do you think it means to love someone? — Possibility
Does Jesus/Yahweh love us or is he stalking us?
Your answer is yes. He does both
But I'm not understanding your argument because
The definitions I have
1. Love (to put something above you're self)
2. stalking (unwanted surveillance)
3. faith (complete trust or confidence in someone or something.) — hachit
When one loves, one loves regardless if one is loved. — Shamshir
They're fictional characters,
— S
Yes I know.
What do you think of the ideology that those who are too indoctrinated to recognize that truth follow?
Is it a moral ideology or an immoral one? — Gnostic Christian Bishop
Shamshir — Gnostic Christian Bishop
It depends how self-aware they are. If they can become self-aware enough to see it for what it is, I say that they should abandon it. — S
So love can be real love even to those who reject yours.
Tell us how that would work, let's say with one you love and who does not love you back.
How would you show that love in a way that was not stalking like? — Gnostic Christian Bishop
I don't think I need to give examples, so I won't. I'm sure you're capable of thinking some up yourself. — S
Love isn't something that needs to be shown, — S
Simply said, love is something you send out to another but if not reflected back, it is never a completed love. You cannot have true love alone. Love to be real love takes two. — Gnostic Christian Bishop
You seem to be talking specifically about ‘true love’ as romantic love - an emotion that, if reciprocated, supposedly leads to romance, sex, marriage and ‘happily ever after’. This is not ‘love’ as described in the bible. Yes, love does require action (works and deeds), but not reciprocity. — Possibility
I love my husband, and he loves me in return, but I know that if something happened that somehow prevented that awareness of reciprocity, I would continue to love him - because I love him for him, not just for me. — Possibility
If I could, I would not have asked for examples. — Gnostic Christian Bishop
So you would not show someone you loved that was hungry your love with some food. Ok.
Or if your child was shivering in bed, you would not show your love by putting a blanket on him. Ok. — Gnostic Christian Bishop
Those are just some of the typical expressions of love. — S
Most who are not led by faith, generally accept the truth stated above. — Gnostic Christian Bishop
Simply said, true love is giving and taking and sharing. if only one is doing it then it is a one sided love and not true love at all. — Gnostic Christian Bishop
You don't need a biblical definition, if the meaning of the world changes we will do our best to find the closest definition we can. That is why we have both the New King James and the New International Version. In fact if you want the exact definition from the bible you need to know Ancient Hebrew.That is not the biblical definition.
What does faith have to do with it? Are you saying that most atheists accept that
love without reciprocity, works and deeds is a true love whereas most good Christians don't? Why do you think that is? — Joshs
I would argue the capability to love someone is a function of one's ability to understand an empathize with another from their own perspective, by slipping into their shoes. That is probably the most difficult task on earth, and for that we need to make use of the most penetrating insights into human nature that are available to us. Embracing christian theological concepts influenced by 17th enlightenment enlightenment thinking will allow one to better achieve love and intimacy with others than relying on a 5th century Christian platonism — Joshs
By the same token, I believe that seeing the world through a Kierkegaardian 'death of god' perspective will enable one to connect more effectively and insightfully with others in friendship and love that by relying on Kantian-era Christian thought. — Joshs
And better still would be understanding and incorporation the psychological insights of postmodernists like Nietzsche in one's social life. — Joshs
So , fist of all, my question to you is, which particular sort of Christianity are you advocating here as a guide to understanding 'true' love? — Joshs
Since you reject a supernatural Jesus, it sounds like your thinking is more evolved than that of 17th century Christian theology. — Joshs
What do you think it is about Christian faith that leads to the valuing of reciprocity for 'true' love in a way that atheism doesn't? — Joshs
I did not have romantic love in mind but I find it interesting that for romantic love, you would think that reciprocity of desire would not need to be around. — Gnostic Christian Bishop
Get involved in philosophical discussions about knowledge, truth, language, consciousness, science, politics, religion, logic and mathematics, art, history, and lots more. No ads, no clutter, and very little agreement — just fascinating conversations.