Yes, and without them, the one you love would not know it. — Gnostic Christian Bishop

False. I'll just repeat what I said and leave it at that. That would be a weak love if it depended on superficial shows of affection. My love is known regardless. Our love for each other is stronger than that.

False. I'll just repeat what I said and leave it at that. That would be a weak love if it depended on superficial shows of affection. My love is known regardless. Our love for each other is stronger than that. — S

How did your love one know you loved him or her?
How do you know you are loved by the other?
Someone had to do something to indicate it.
If you do not see that something as a work or deed then -------
Regards
DL

For love, reciprocity is not necessary, and in fact should neither be expected nor requested. — Possibility

So theoretically, when you say, I love you, to the next person you fall in live with, and the sentiment is not returned, you will not care or expect reciprocity and just keep on wondering if they love you in return. I do not believe that.

Regards
DL

Test — Joshs

Was that a question?

Regards
DL

Again, you’re referring to romantic love (which in my view is primarily desire, but potentially points us towards love) as if that were the same love as described in the bible. It isn’t the same thing.

When I love someone, it doesn’t matter if they love me in return. When I ‘fall in love’, it does matter. But how I respond to a lack of reciprocity is not to stop loving them, even as I walk away from the romantic relationship.

When I love someone, it doesn’t matter if they love me in return. — Possibility

I think we all dislike wasting our love and having it rejected, but ok.

Regards
DL

How did your love one know you loved him or her?
How do you know you are loved by the other?
Someone had to do something to indicate it.
If you do not see that something as a work or deed then — Gnostic Christian Bishop

You've switched to past-tense. That's moving the goalposts.

And indications of love are not love itself. I shouldn't have to keep repeating that my point is to do with love, and the distinction between love and shows, acts, expressions, indications, displays, etc. Are you trying to muddy the waters or what?

Do you really think it’s wasted? Is it wasted to love a plant - to feed and nurture it, give it your time and effort, knowing that it may never show its love for you in return? If what we do is ultimately for our own benefit, how is that love?

Have you raised children? Have you ever spent time preparing a special meal or gift for a two year old, only to have them throw it on the floor or reject it without so much as a thought to how you might feel? I can see how you may think this is ‘wasted love’, but it isn’t really, because love is never wasted when it’s given without needing reciprocity. It only seems that way because we’ve been taught that avoiding pain, humiliation and loss is apparently what we should be striving for. Everything we do must have a kickback, otherwise what’s the point?

Are you trying to muddy the waters or what? — S

Not in the least, but you are by indicating that we are talking about those who would lie about love.

Regards
DL

Do you really think it’s wasted? Is it wasted to love a plant - to feed and nurture it, give it your time and effort, knowing that it may never show its love for you in return? If what we do is ultimately for our own benefit, how is that love? — Possibility

If you love plants and shoes and your hair style, we are not defining love the same way.

So yes, it is a waste of time to love anything that cannot know what love is.

we’ve been taught that avoiding pain, humiliation and loss is apparently what we should be striving for. — Possibility

If you were taught that then you were taught not to compete for anything as competition is doing just that.

This indicates that you have stopped evolving and will stagnate in whatever situation you are in.

Regards
DL

Not in the least, but you are by indicating that we are talking about those who would lie about love. — Gnostic Christian Bishop

I indicated no such thing. You clearly don't know what I'm talking about, and I'm losing enthusiasm to correct your misunderstandings, so I think I'll just let it be and go find something else to do.

If you love plants and shoes and your hair style, we are not defining love the same way. — Gnostic Christian Bishop

Interesting that you relate to plants in the same way as you do to shoes and hairstyles. I don’t, and I’ve already explained my understanding of love, but this statement indicates that you haven’t taken much notice of that.

I sincerely hope this is not just a feeble attempt to trivialise my argument. That would be disappointing.

That would be disappointing. — Possibility

Yes, like you saying above that you apply the word love to plants then berate me for showing the foolishness of that.

Regards
DL

Ok, explain to me why it is foolish to love a plant - as in to do what I can in order to enable that plant to grow, develop and do what it can. Tell me how loving a plant in this way is the same as saying that I ‘love’ a hairstyle.

If you cannot see the misuse of the term love towards non-sentient life, when we are talking of love that people share, then you are not worth my time.

When those who love me say they do, it is not the same "love" that they say when they love their shoes.

But hey, if you want to love your mate the same way you love your plants, have at it.

Regards
DL

@Gnostic Christian Bishop

Your argument seems to take the following form:
1. If someone loves someone without that love being reciprocated, then the person is stalking their love, which doesn’t constitute love.
2. God loves everyone, without that love being reciprocated.
3. Therefore, God is stalking everyone who doesn’t love him back. (1,2, MP)

I would like to raise an objection to your first premise. First, there are many counterexamples of this not being the case. What about a mother who loves the child in her womb without having even met the child. Is that mother all of a sudden a stalker? Surely you wouldn’t think so.

Perhaps I’m being uncharitable in my break down of your argument. Maybe you mean a different kind of love, love for someone who isn’t in your family. Then that would be stalkerish according to your analysis of scripture. However, according to scripture we are “all His children.”

Let’s assume for a minute he’s not a family member, though. There are instances when someone loves somebody without that love being reciprocated that don’t constitute stalker behavior. What about the teenage fans of One Direction? Is their unrequited love for their favorite band stalkerish behavior simply because Harry Styles doesn’t know who they are, and therefore can’t love them back? This is not the case.

Happy to hear out your responses.

Does Jesus/Yahweh love us or is he stalking us? — Gnostic Christian Bishop

The two figures you refer to are in no way the same thing.

The God of the Jewish, Christian and Islamic religions is more a Peeping Tom or voyeur than a stalker. Stalking requires far more effort than watching, and that God's perpetual observation of us would be effortless.

1. If someone loves someone without that love being reciprocated, then the person is stalking their love, which doesn’t constitute love. — James Moore

I would like to raise an objection to your first premise. First, there are many counterexamples of this not being the case. What about a mother who loves the child in her womb without having even met the child. Is that mother all of a sudden a stalker? Surely you wouldn’t think so. — James Moore

She is a stalker if she, like Jesus, tells that baby that it will suffer purposelessly in hell if the child does not love his mother back just so.

I do see a reciprocal love there. At least whenever the baby of zygote develops it's instincts.
The mother insures the both her health and the baby's, while the baby does its best to reach it's best possible end.

Candide.
"It is demonstrable that things cannot be otherwise than as they are; for as all things have been created for some end, they must necessarily be created for the best end.”

However, according to scripture we are “all His children.” — James Moore

According to scriptures, there are also real talking serpents and donkeys, but yes, when in fantasy mode, the bible says that.

Strange then that our Father condemned us all unjustly. Then again, we Gnostic Christians have always called that prick a demiurge.

What about the teenage fans of One Direction? — James Moore

Lots of reciprocity there. Artists give art and those who like it give their cash and adoration pay back.

2. God loves everyone, without that love being reciprocated. — James Moore

That first is demonstrably false, unless you think you could murder someone you loved.

Hell. The bible begins with god murdering A & E after god deciding to have Jesus needlessly sacrificed/murdered.

If god love us all, he sure shows a satanic kind of love.

Regards
DL

The two figures you refer to are in no way the same thing. — uncanni

They are to most Christians, Trinitarians and all.

Neither are real to me, so I will not argue against your point.

Regards
DL

effortless. — Ciceronianus the White

Oky dokly, but I can think of nothing more boring. It would be like a perpetual re-run.

Regards
DL

Yes. A God so devoted to watching humanity must be terribly bored, unless peculiarly obsessed by us. In either case, a sad, strange figure.

Yes. A God so devoted to watching humanity must be terribly bored, unless peculiarly obsessed by us. In either case, a sad, strange figure. — Ciceronianus the White

We are God's streaming soap opera reality show.

In either case, a sad, strange figure. — Ciceronianus the White

Not to mention as immoral as they say Satan is. Christians call evil good.

Regards
DL