I actually didn’t assume that he hadn’t prayed about the gospel. In fact, I’d actually asked him if he HAD prayed about it and the answer was ‘no. I don’t think I have to’ or something to that affect. That’s fine with me though; I suggested that he give it a try, that he might be surprised to learn that God is there and the gospel is true. Whether someone believes in God or not, prayer’s still a valid form of ‘research’, if you will, to find truth to an issue.
I think, perhaps, that the real test is in the listening for a response. God doesn’t necessarily answer our prayers when we want them, or in the fashion we would choose. Part of it has to do with learning patience and a willingness to continue in all diligence until an answer is received. Prayer is work and I know, from personal experiences, that it can get really difficult and tedious, especially the last two or three years for me, where I’ve basically stopped praying. Not because of a lack of belief on my part, but more due to my assumption that He doesn’t want to hear from someone who’s descended to my level, never mind the amount of scripture that teaches the exact opposite of my assumption.
In the end I try not to assume too much about someone I’m talking to about the gospel. That would be very condescending, indeed. I think the emphasis about prayer should be placed on the listening instead of praying more and more, harder and harder. But I certainly can’t say for anyone other than myself. I know prayer merits a response from God, on His timetable, but I tend to be too thick when it comes to actually listening.
I can understand being annoyed too. I feel the same when people automatically assume that because I’m part of a particular religion that I’m going to hell, or some rubbish like that. Very UN-CHRISTIAN of them, don’t you think?
Posts: 42 | Registered: Nov 2005
| IP: Logged |
Hmm… my asking him to pray wasn’t in an attempt to convert but to honestly refer him to the best source I could think of for a verifiable answer. Anyone can read scriptures and anyone can listen to someone else’s beliefs, etc, but until they go to the source, then that’s all they’re doing: reading, listening to others opinions/beliefs (not a bad thing to do, though, don’t get me wrong). If he had tried it and received no answer and he acts according to that experience, I’d have had no problem with that. If he had converted, that would’ve been awesome, but it’s his choice, not mine. I think it was more an attempt to give him the best, most honest answer I could think of, without trying to sound like a preacher (I know they can be really annoying).
Posts: 42 | Registered: Nov 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:You have now redefined "loving your god" in such a way that it just means "being a decent human being". I do not think this is a reasonable use of the words in question.
Perhaps that is why you find it so difficult to understand how Christians can reasonably accept their faith...
The link between loving God and loving other human beings is fundamental to Christianity - far more so than any of the "political" issues that Christianity is involved in today, such as gay marriage, evolution, or abortion. I believe the love of God and the love of one's neighbors are inseperably connected. After all, the central story of Christianity is about when God came down to earth and literally was one of our neighbors.
This is what Christianity is all about, in my view. It is not about judging other people or their actions, and it is not about trying to pass some sort of moral test to get into heaven. Rather, it is about the relationship we are supposed to have with God and our fellow human beings, if we are to be happy and if we are to do good in the world. It is about how "being a decent human being" and "loving God" are virtually the same thing.
Posts: 8120 | Registered: Jul 2000
| IP: Logged |
posted
Tres, I know perfectly well that you love nothing better than to redefine words in any way that will let you win on argument, or even just have an argument, preferably on semantics. That's why I generally ignore you. One more time: If you intend to indicate "Playing Dance Dance Revolution", say so. Don't call it "Loving God". That way madness lies.
Posts: 10645 | Registered: Jul 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
Unrelated to everything else, I haven't' read everything yet, but a thought occurred to me:
As a human being, I've had thoughts, sometimes evil, sometimes not quite as evil as that, that some groups of people are evil enough to deserve destruction. Or at least need to be dealt with far more firmly than they are being dealt with in this anarchic world.
And that, beyond individual humans who deserve death.
When I realize that, if I had the power, even I would be tempted to do such things in the face of seemingly true evil, without perfect knowledge, how could I ever argue that an omnipotent entity, if it existed, who knew the hearts of all beings as the Christian god is defined as being, is not allowed to do so if said god feels it the best choice?
Claiming such would make me a hypocrite, wouldn't it?
Posts: 1577 | Registered: Sep 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
KoM, I'd just like to point out that your statement that you cannot consciously choose who to love or be attracted to is not, in fact, a given.
Posts: 17164 | Registered: Jun 2001
| IP: Logged |
quote:Tres, I know perfectly well that you love nothing better than to redefine words in any way that will let you win on argument, or even just have an argument, preferably on semantics.
No, you need to go back and question your assumptions - what you "know perfectly well" is false. Think again about what Christians may mean when they equate loving God and acting decently towards others. It has virtually nothing at all to do with definitions or words.
Posts: 8120 | Registered: Jul 2000
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Rakeesh: KoM, I'd just like to point out that your statement that you cannot consciously choose who to love or be attracted to is not, in fact, a given.
I think it's a reasonable assertion, unless you can meet a stranger on the street and instantly love them, in any meaningful more than "I love everyone" kind of way.
What you *can* do, however, is make choices that make it more likely that you'll come to love someone, such as spending time with them, performing kind acts for them, etc. It's like choosing to have cancer vs. choosing to smoke. You may want to have cancer (for some reason) and you may choose to smoke to get cancer, but there is no guarantee that cancer will occur. It's not a choice that you have.
Posts: 3275 | Registered: May 2007
| IP: Logged |
quote:No, you need to go back and question your assumptions - what you "know perfectly well" is false. Think again about what Christians may mean when they equate loving God and acting decently towards others. It has virtually nothing at all to do with definitions or words.
You are conflating "loving god" with "doing what god wants me to do." People often express their love for god in a specific, individual way - "I love God" which is similar in sentiment to how they express their love for their family members. Heck, sometimes they make even more explicit - "I love God because He sent His son to die for my sins." They are talking about a feeling about God as an individual, not about their behavior to others, though they will often credit their feeling about God for their behavior to others.
Posts: 3275 | Registered: May 2007
| IP: Logged |
Jesus doesn't measure love in units of feelings. He measures love in units of obedience.
He alluded to this throughout the gospels.
quote:John 14
15 If you love me, keep my commandments. ____________________
John 5
2 In this we know that we love the children of God: when we love God, and keep his commandments.
____________________
3 John 15
10 If you keep my commandments, you shall abide in my love; as I also have kept my Father's commandments, and do abide in his love.
____________________
4 John 14
21 He that hath my commandments, and keepeth them; he it is that loveth me. And he that loveth me, shall be loved of my Father: and I will love him, and will manifest myself to him.
The commandments involve more than feeling a certain way. They instruct us in our actions, teaching us how to act toward God and one another.
Posts: 6 | Registered: Mar 2008
| IP: Logged |
posted
Well...I'm not enamored of the units of obedience bit, but there's a good point to what Stormie says.
Love of God requires not just feeling, but action. We can't just say we want to help the poor and destitute; we have to actually be up and about it.
Posts: 14554 | Registered: Dec 1999
| IP: Logged |
posted
Whats the conversion rate between kilobediences and feeling furlongs? I seem to have misplaced my calculator.
Posts: 7593 | Registered: Sep 2006
| IP: Logged |
posted
That's not necessarily true. Just because something is measured does not mean it starts at zero, after all.
Posts: 17164 | Registered: Jun 2001
| IP: Logged |
quote:Love of God requires not just feeling, but action
Love of anything requres action more than feeling. Love is action, not some sort of passive feeling, and it compells attendant actions.
I've never seen love that I would recognize as such equated to obedience though. There's a huge difference to me between seeing the love in how someone acts versus "If you love me, you'll always do what I say."
Posts: 10177 | Registered: Apr 2001
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Stormie: Love is an act of the will.
I would love to see your evidence for this. I don't think love is an act of the will, any more than belief is.
Posts: 3852 | Registered: Feb 2002
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by MrSquicky: Love of anything requres action more than feeling. Love is action, not some sort of passive feeling, and it compells attendant actions.
quote: I've never seen love that I would recognize as such equated to obedience though.
Of course not. I'm not sure that's what was being said, though. The way I read it (and it's a minority opinion, it seems), the obedience being referred to is obedience to the idea of treating people with love.
God commands us to love our neighbor according to many traditions, and since love is not just a feeling, God might measure one's love by 'units of obedience', i.e. how often they live it.
Posts: 17164 | Registered: Jun 2001
| IP: Logged |
quote:God commands us to love our neighbor according to many traditions, and since love is not just a feeling, God might measure one's love by 'units of obedience', i.e. how often they live it.
That doesn't make sense to. If you are loving your neighbor as obedience to a command, you aren't loving them in a way I recognize.
If you wouldn't "love" them absent a command to do so, it's not love. If you would, it's not obedience.
Posts: 10177 | Registered: Apr 2001
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by MrSquicky: If you are loving your neighbor as obedience to a command, you aren't loving them in a way I recognize.
How is that not in contradiction to what you posted that I agreed with before?
I don't see how it is in contradiction.
Love is done for it's own sake and the sake of the loved thing. It can't be done because someone else tells you to.
Posts: 10177 | Registered: Apr 2001
| IP: Logged |
posted
I'm not sure I understand your thinking. It's not a question of motivation. It's a matter of not doing the thing without doing the thing. You can't love without loving and love implies that you are focused on and engaged with the loved thing. This isn't something you can do for an external reason.
You can't love a person because you parents want you to. You can't love someone because you are afraid of being alone. You can only fake it if that's how you come at it.
The most you can do is try to love someone by trying to see what it is in them that is lovable. But I don't think that that's something you can really do for a third party either.
---
Also, for me, in almost all cases, motivation is part of action. An action that is done for one reason is fundamentally different from one that it is done for another.
Posts: 10177 | Registered: Apr 2001
| IP: Logged |
posted
I disagree. Doing loving things for someone will cause you feel loving towards them.
However, I would agree that doing lovings things halfheartedly (which is likely in all the scenarios you painted) won't do much.
Posts: 32919 | Registered: Mar 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
"Doing loving things for someone will cause you feel loving towards them. "
The one doesn't equal the other.
You can certainly do loving actions, without meaning them. Sure, there is a correlation, especially considering how altruistic many actions we consider loving are, but it's rather easy to do an action one will consider loving, without feeling love. Many other reason to do such things, many of them not positive, others at least partially do.
I don't mean doing the act in a halfhearted manner. But you don't magically feel love for someone because you do something one considers nice for them.
Unless we're using some squishy definition of a loving act, where by definition it means an act done out of love. Then, it's just a tautology...
Posts: 1577 | Registered: Sep 2005
| IP: Logged |
Scenario: An old woman sits on a street corner covered with oozing sores. She's hungry and penniless.
Three imperfect men walk by:
#1) Bob sees her plight, and feels great love for her in his heart and thinks about her throughout the day, but he doesn't pray for her and doesn't do anything to alleviate her plight.
2) Joe sees her and is disgusted by her appearance. Even though he knows that it's uncharitable, his first reaction is to run away from her .. . because, ew, she's just so gross. Then, he remembers that when he feeds the hungry, he is feeding Jesus. So, despite having no feelings of love toward the woman (just repugnance), he stops and gives her a loaf of bread. He's poor, so this is no small sacrifice.
#3) Frank sees the womam and feels neutral about her plight. He intends to walk by her, but just then he sees several people from his church sitting at the outdoor cafe across the way. So, he raises his hands and loudly storms the heavens, asking God to bless her. He reaches in his pocket, waving a $100 bill in the air for all to see. Then he hands it to the woman, telling her that he loves her and God loves her too. ___________________________
Questions to think about:
1. Which man/men has done as God commanded?
2. Which man showed the greater love toward God? Why?
3. How did Bob's feelings of love help the woman?
4. Did Joe's lack of feelings come between him and his Christian duty?
5. Frank helped the woman as commanded, but, did he do it out of love of God?
6. Who helped the woman the most? Why?
7. Who did the least amount to help the woman? Why? _____
I don't know where this is going, if anywhere, but I thought I'd throw it out there.
Posts: 6 | Registered: Mar 2008
| IP: Logged |
posted
I have no difficulty imagining Resh loudly exclaiming, in the middle of an otherwise empty room, "Screw you, leprechauns!"
Posts: 37449 | Registered: May 1999
| IP: Logged |
quote:Doing loving things for someone will cause you feel loving towards them.
I think this is unlikely if you are doing them to fulfill some external conditions/mandate, unless, of course, the external forces are relatively weak. But even then, I don't know that I'd call the cognitive dissonance reducing reactions love.
Posts: 10177 | Registered: Apr 2001
| IP: Logged |
posted
Resh: Javert has it. Atheists don't "reject" God anymore than we reject Santa Claus, Cthullu, Vishnu, etc. We can't reject something that doesn't exist. We can reject your teachings, your writings, and your way of life. Those are things that exist. But God itself? Not so much.
Its an subtle issue with the language itself. Like say, in the abortion debate, the biased language of the paired terms "pro-choice" and "anti-choice." Both assume that choice is the important factor at work in order to subliminally(?) cast the latter choice in a bad light simply by the language used.
Heck, the term doesn't even necessarily make sense for atheists that have grown up as atheists without ever encountering the idea of the Christian God. How can you reject something that not only doesn't exist but that you've never heard of? Bah.
(By contrast, it could be said that Satanists reject God, they accept the existence of God but choose to worship something else.)
Posts: 7593 | Registered: Sep 2006
| IP: Logged |
posted
To be fair, I reject Resh's god. But then, I'm not an athiest. I'm willing to grant the idea that his god may exist. I just think that that god is evil, if he does exist, and thus reject him on a provisional basis.
Posts: 10177 | Registered: Apr 2001
| IP: Logged |
quote:The most you can do is try to love someone by trying to see what it is in them that is lovable. But I don't think that that's something you can really do for a third party either.
Hmm. I guess I define 'obedience' differently-I need to look up the precise definitions, but I don't consider primary intention to be necessary for obedience.
If, for example, a child eats his broccoli like his parents tell him to, but does it because he enjoys it (obviously some mutant child here; keep an eye on him), I would still consider that child obedient in that area.
Posts: 17164 | Registered: Jun 2001
| IP: Logged |
posted
For me that's not obedient. He would be obedient if the primary reason behind his action would be "because my parents told me so". If you're posting on this forum because you want to, and I say "post on this forum", the two don't actually influence each other. It's just a coincidence.
Posts: 4519 | Registered: Sep 2003
| IP: Logged |
quote:- You there, Strawberry. Hit a home run. - Sure thing Skip. *crack* - I told him to do that.
If someone had never heard of Jesus, but lived his life with love for his neighbor, could you measure this love in units of obedience?
Posts: 10177 | Registered: Apr 2001
| IP: Logged |
quote:If someone had never heard of Jesus, but lived his life with love for his neighbor, could you measure this love in units of obedience?
Seeing as how I believe God speaks to everyone, not just those who have heard of Jesus, and tries to help us love our neighbor, sure Mr. Squicky, I think it could be measured that way. Not by me, obviously.
-------
quote:For me that's not obedient. He would be obedient if the primary reason behind his action would be "because my parents told me so". If you're posting on this forum because you want to, and I say "post on this forum", the two don't actually influence each other. It's just a coincidence.
OK, how about this: I obey the laws against theft, murder, rape, assault, arson, and a bunch of other things for a variety of reasons. Almost universally I adhere to the law because I think it's the right thing to do.
I'm obeying the law, of course. I'm obedient to the rules of my society, not because it is the rule of society, but for other reasons.
I am still obedient to a given order or commandment, even if I obey for a reason beyond, "I was told to."
Posts: 17164 | Registered: Jun 2001
| IP: Logged |
quote:OK, how about this: I obey the laws against theft, murder, rape, assault, arson, and a bunch of other things for a variety of reasons. Almost universally I adhere to the law because I think it's the right thing to do.
I'm obeying the law, of course. I'm obedient to the rules of my society, not because it is the rule of society, but for other reasons.
No, I don't see that you are. Your behavior conforms with it, but, to me, obeying someone implies an active component, not passively going along with what they said.
Are you obeying laws that you've never heard of just because you are not breaking them?
Posts: 10177 | Registered: Apr 2001
| IP: Logged |
posted
Basically it comes down to this: loving thy neighbor because God told you to? Well, that's better than nothing (and for some people, it seems like it'd be a lot, actually), but it's not enough.
Loving thy neighbor because you want to be the sort of person who loves they neighbor, because God has asked you to, along with a bunch of persuasive reasons? That's a good thing, and it's got little if anything to do with being forced.
-----------
To Matt's point earlier, which I forgot to address: obviously to love someone specifically, you need to know them specifically to some extent. I didn't mean to say that we can choose who we love as in, "That guy I passed in my car on the way to work who I've never met before and never will again, I love him from the bottom of my heart, now and forever."
Of course not. That would be impossible. But I believe you can pick a person you know, get to know them, and work until you love them. I don't mean it's easy, I mean it's possible.
Love doesn't have to be something that just happens to us, like a rainy day or a cold or something.
Posts: 17164 | Registered: Jun 2001
| IP: Logged |
quote:No, I don't see that you are. Your behavior conforms with it, but, to me, obeying someone implies an active component, not passively going along with what they said.
There was nothing passive about the example I gave, Mr. Squicky.
To clarify further, among the list of reasons why I don't do those things is that they are against the law, and I generally respect the law; also that I do not wish to be subject to penalties for breaking them. Those things just aren't the first reason I don't murder people who displease me.
Am I obeying the law?
Posts: 17164 | Registered: Jun 2001
| IP: Logged |
posted
Hmm I see what you're saying. I think the problem comes from the word itself; I see "obey" as "act because of someone else's wish", and not "act in the same way as someone else's wish". Whether or not you act in the same way as a stipulated law is a different thing from knowing about the law. I respect a lot of laws I don't understand; but when I understand them and I choose to act that way because they agree with my philosophical/economical system, I'm not merely obeying the law anymore.
Posts: 4519 | Registered: Sep 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
That's fine. In that case, I'd say you are obeying the law.
What about when you've never heard of the law?
---
Also, as I started out with, loving someone is fundamentally different from something like obeying the law.
Loving contains the action in itself. Loving denotes an engagement in the loved thing. You can't have love without this engagement.
You can't love someone because someone told you to any more than you can appreciate a piece of art because someone told you to.
Posts: 10177 | Registered: Apr 2001
| IP: Logged |
Printer-friendly view of this topic
![[Smile]](smile.gif)
![[ROFL]](graemlins/rofl.gif)
