Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
The agape proponents continuosly open with "God is love", and then close with a hatefilled remark of sorts. Not necessarily in this order, but that's not the point.
I think it is the point. I come on here looking for 'Is this what the Father is doing?' and I get both a resounding No and a Yes at the same time. No, with respect to these debates are not edifying, period - of themselves, they change no-ones opinion. It's what comes after... But, there is a Yes with respect to it was one such debate that stopped me posting regularly here, ...and brought me some thinking time to evaluate my level of love and its expression - ultimately, my orthodoxy had to change, and it is in the process of changing.
The agape proponents continuosly open with "God is love", and then close with a hatefilled remark of sorts. Not necessarily in this order, but that's not the point.
I like the spinning comment.
Thankyou it reminded me of an old puzzle of sorts.
And once again, when someone disagrees with Rbbi or any other fundamentalist type, you all call it hate-filled. When you all disagree with any non-fundamentalist types (or condemn them or mock them or mock love) you call that love. Explain that double standard.
The agape proponents continuosly open with "God is love", and then close with a hatefilled remark of sorts. Not necessarily in this order, but that's not the point.
Interestingly, I rarely see a bible inerrantist on this forum ever say "God is love" unless they add a "but" to it as if whatever comes after the "but" somehow nullifies the statement that "God is love", or at least makes it innocuous. Love seems like a very fearful or distasteful or even abhorrent concept to some of you.
It makes me wonder if the reason is because you know you don't walk in love perfectly. When you consider the statement that you are to be perfect/complete as your Father in heaven is perfect/complete, you can feel good about yourselves if you think God is wrathful and condemning or even mocks. Because that means when you do it, you're emulating God -- it allows, even encourages, that behavior. But if you acknowledge that God is LOVE, knowing full well that those things do not flow from love, then you have no excuse.
Well, guess what? We're all in the same boat. I think most of us who DO believe that God is love (no qualifiers included) and talk about it, recognize that we do not walk perfectly in the spirit of God. What better reason could there be, though, for lifting up the truth that God IS love, and for focusing on that, since what we focus on determines what we will become? I trust that, ultimately, it is that spirit of Love within all of us which will bring the "work started in us to completion".
The agape proponents continuosly open with "God is love", and then close with a hatefilled remark of sorts. Not necessarily in this order, but that's not the point.
They might as well say "God is love, but I am hate". Most of the time I don't even read their nonsense anymore.
With respect to the work of unconditional love becoming complete in us:
Mike Nevins (...what the hell, I may as well quote him) says "God (as a concept) equals control". Religion started in the garden (not at some indistinguishable point or period of emergence, later in time) - it started when mankind got a physical body - the physical body / carnal mind created a need for rulership - just a vain imagination folks - nothing more. The God concept is that there's someone, out there, watching us, who has to DO something to or for us. The opposite of that is true - that We are all indivudal expressions of the One, Him - He is NOT out there. He is in us, and dwells in us. Unconditional love doesn't need to DO anything, per se, it just is. It is Abba. What does He, and therefore us, need for fulfillment? - nothing, absolutely nothing! He lives in what He is - and that's why in Him we live and move and have our being - there is no me - my ego/I died this morning, and it will need to die again tomorrow morning. It's where the reality of being, and such statements as "I and the Father are One" come from. All means all and One means one. It's the shocking truth.
We have to face the issue of the sacrificial system, and the law, ney “God’s”, requirement for it, at some point, …because “the life is in the blood”. If the life is in the blood, and God’s all about life right, why not just leave the blood alone…? I mean really, if that’s where the life is, just LEAVE IT ALONE!
It’s to do with law then, and which law – the law of sin and death or the law of life.
Laws are consistent within themselves – of that there can be no doubt. Gravity always acts to attract two masses together - It never stops doing that, simply because it is. So, we either say God’s law of life ACTUALLY requires death, or it was simply the law of sin and death that gave rise to / produced the sacrificial system, that demanded physical death for spiritual life. WTF!? . This latter law (…remember, laws are consistent within themselves) would point to the consistency of wordage, interpretation and application, even the brilliance of the symbologies, within the bible. It’s a law after all – it couldn’t ever be inconsistent with itself.
It’s an extremely tough nut to crack, that “God” said something to someone and it is quoted verbatim in the bible / scriptures as being THE VERY WORDS of unconditional love, as opposed to the carnal / fleshly mind’s imaginations / need to control.
Well, you did it. You convinced me you think you know everything and so must constantly correct those of us who do not. Which reinforces my belief that you are not here for an exchange of ideas. You are here so you can preach at people and tell us, "You're wrong!!"
The whirrring sound is your fundashield going up when you meet someone who doesn't share your version of religion. So I'll just wait for your next revelation of how you apply that in the real world. Thought the book burning will be hard to beat. Periwinkles.
I do not believe that means do not love anything you see with the physical eye outside of us, but the former old world within that we lived by. You know the one that sees fault in everything but ourselves. Walk in unconditional love and forgiveness towards the world without us and we will not be loving the world we formerly lived by.
Right.
Forgive me my tresspasses as I forgive those who trespass against me.
You know I would like to share something Rbb1 wrote me.
He reaps were he does not sow.
This prayer reminds me every day to be thankful for all the blessings in recieved even through the painfull experiences.
And once again, when someone disagrees with Rbbi or any other fundamentalist type, you all call it hate-filled. When you all disagree with any non-fundamentalist types (or condemn them or mock them or mock love) you call that love. Explain that double standard.
Firstly, if you want to open a dialog with some one it would be help full to avoid assertation in a certain direction.
Second, if I have ever seemed to mock anyone please let me now how. This may merely be a misunderstanding. I am no stranger to this. I have given compliments and gifts to someone only to have them turn on me occasionally.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
