Ship of Fools: What does it mean to love God ?

Thread: What does it mean to love God ? Board: Oblivion / Ship of Fools.

To visit this thread, use this URL:
http://forum.ship-of-fools.com/cgi-bin/ultimatebb.cgi?ubb=get_topic;f=70;t=028808

Posted by Russ (# 120) on :

I guess most here are familiar with the bit in Mark ch 12 where Jesus says that the two meta-commandments are to love God and love neighbour.

But what does it mean to love God ?

Some people seem to think love of neighbour is love of God, so that the first meta-commandment is redundant and in practice there is only the second.

Some people seem to think that love of God means love of rituals of worship (that men have devised as a response to the love of God) and love of the protocols and culture of their church.

Some people seem to think it means Jesus-fandom.

I tend to the view that it means love of beauty, justice, truth - the attributes of God - for their own sake (whether it pleases your neighbour or not), but that doesn't seem totally satisfactory.

Any thoughts ?

Does having two meta-commandments mean that there can be tension between the two ?

Best wishes,

Russ

Posted by LeRoc (# 3216) on :

I guessto me, it's a combination of:

quote:
Russ: Some people seem to think love of neighbour is love of God, so that the first meta-commandment is redundant and in practice there is only the second.

and

quote:
Russ: I tend to the view that it means love of beauty, justice, truth - the attributes of God - for their own sake (whether it pleases your neighbour or not), but that doesn't seem totally satisfactory.

I'm not sure what justice means if we leave our neighbour out of it though.

Posted by Raptor Eye (# 16649) on :

I think it means that God comes first, before ourselves and anyone else, so yes there can be a tension. Recently someone told me how a mother often told her children that God came before them, so that they ended up resentful of God. That's not the way it should be. They should have been as delighted by the love of God as she was.

I don't see it as loving God's attributes, although I do. Nor is it Jesus fandom, although I am a follower of Jesus. Nor is it love of worship, enjoyable though it is. It is wholehearted love for the God I become conscious of often spiritually when I pray, as I worship, as I live my life, the God who knows me intimately and who allows me to see the glimpses I can cope with of himself.

Posted by no prophet's flag is set so... (# 15560) on :

I think the question points to the careless vocabulary we have in English. I love my children. Don't you just love those shoes? I love making love.

Love in the "love God" phrase, seems to mean that you wish to follow God, or more specifically, the teachings of those whom you believe taught the right ways to live.

Posted by W Hyatt (# 14250) on :

quote:
Originally posted by Russ:
But what does it mean to love God ?

It's not a matter of forcing ourselves to feel some emotion towards God, it's enough to compel ourselves to keep his commandments. Doing a search for "love" and "commandments" shows that the two are frequently linked explicitly:

From the New Testament:

"If you love Me, you will keep My commandments." Joh 14:15

"He who has My commandments and keeps them is the one who loves Me; and he who loves Me will be loved by My Father, and I will love him and will disclose Myself to him." Joh 14:21

"By this we know that we love the children of God, when we love God and observe His commandments." 1Jo 5:2

"For this is the love of God, that we keep His commandments; and His commandments are not burdensome." 1Jo 5:3

"And this is love, that we walk according to His commandments. This is the commandment, just as you have heard from the beginning, that you should walk in it." 2Jo 1:6

From the Old Testament:

"but showing lovingkindness to thousands, to those who love Me and keep My commandments." Ex 20:6

"but showing lovingkindness to thousands, to those who love Me and keep My commandments." De 5:10

"Know therefore that the LORD your God, He is God, the faithful God, who keeps His covenant and His lovingkindness to a thousandth generation with those who love Him and keep His commandments;" De 7:9

"You shall therefore love the LORD your God, and always keep His charge, His statutes, His ordinances, and His commandments." De 11:1

"It shall come about, if you listen obediently to my commandments which I am commanding you today, to love the LORD your God and to serve Him with all your heart and all your soul," De 11:13

"in that I command you today to love the LORD your God, to walk in His ways and to keep His commandments and His statutes and His judgments, that you may live and multiply, and that the LORD your God may bless you in the land where you are entering to possess it." De 30:16

"Only be very careful to observe the commandment and the law which Moses the servant of the LORD commanded you, to love the LORD your God and walk in all His ways and keep His commandments and hold fast to Him and serve Him with all your heart and with all your soul." Jos 22:5

"I said, "I beseech You, O LORD God of heaven, the great and awesome God, who preserves the covenant and lovingkindness for those who love Him and keep His commandments," Ne 1:5

"I prayed to the LORD my God and confessed and said, "Alas, O Lord, the great and awesome God, who keeps His covenant and lovingkindness for those who love Him and keep His commandments," Da 9:4

Posted by mousethief (# 953) on :

quote:
Originally posted by W Hyatt:

quote:
Originally posted by Russ:
But what does it mean to love God ?
It's not a matter of forcing ourselves to feel some emotion towards God, it's enough to compel ourselves to keep his commandments. Doing a search for "love" and "commandments" shows that the two are frequently linked explicitly:

From the New Testament:

"If you love Me, you will keep My commandments."

This quickly becomes circular. What does it mean to love God? To keep his commandments. What are the greatest commandments? To love God and to love others. Wait, what does it mean to love God? To keep his commandments. Which commandments? Well, to start out, the commandment to love God. Which means what?

I trust you see the problem?

Posted by W Hyatt (# 14250) on :

Sure, but it's not completely circular since there are other commandments like the Ten Commandments and "love one another as I have loved you."

Posted by Martin60 (# 368) on :

Argument is circular.

Posted by IngoB (# 8700) on :

quote:
Originally posted by mousethief:
This quickly becomes circular. What does it mean to love God? To keep his commandments. What are the greatest commandments? To love God and to love others. Wait, what does it mean to love God? To keep his commandments. Which commandments? Well, to start out, the commandment to love God. Which means what? I trust you see the problem?

If we combine

"You shall love the Lord your God with all your heart, and with all your soul, and with all your mind. This is the great and first commandment. " (Mt 22:37-38)

and

For this is the love of God, that we keep his commandments. And his commandments are not burdensome. (1 Jn 5:3)

then we get

"You shall keep the commandments of the Lord your God with all your heart, and with all your soul, and with all your mind. This is the great and first commandment."

This is clearly not circular, as you claim, since any number of additional commandments of God can be included in this. And it is not even really circular in reference to itself, since one can be enthusiastic about being enthusiastic. However, it also is not simply "enough to compel ourselves to keep his commandments", as W Hyatt claims. Rather to the contrary, the point here is not that one must obey the commandments of God (which, we can presume, is understood) but rather than one is to do this emphatically and with full engagement.

Be zealous, be fervent in matters of God. Do not be lukewarm, for the fear of retching noises. That's the message.

Posted by EloiseA (# 18029) on :

I was taught the Penny Catechism at the age of five and that satisfied me then and has helped me over the years because it showed me clearly that to 'know,love and serve God in this life' was the purpose for which I was created. And how I was to go about knowing, loving and serving God through the Church.

2. Why did God make you?

God made me to know Him, love Him and serve Him in this world, and be happy with Him forever in the next.

8. What must you do to save your soul?

To save my soul I must worship God by Faith, Hope and Charity; that is, I must believe in him, I must hope in him, and I must love him with my whole heart.

9. What is faith?

Faith is a supernatural gift of God, which enables us to believe without doubting whatever God has revealed.

10. Why must you believe whatever God has revealed?

I must believe whatever God has revealed because God is the very truth, and can neither deceive nor be deceived.

11. How are you to know what God has revealed?

I am to know what God has revealed by the testimony, teaching, and authority of the Catholic Church.

12. Who gave the Catholic Church divine authority to teach?

Jesus Christ gave the Catholic Church divine authority to teach, when he said, 'Go ye and teach all nations.' Matt.28:19

Source here: Penny Catechism

Posted by LeRoc (# 3216) on :

quote:
EloiseA: I was taught the Penny Catechism at the age of five and that satisfied me then and has helped me over the years because it showed me clearly that to 'know,love and serve God in this life' was the purpose for which I was created. And how I was to go about knowing, loving and serving God through the Church.

LOL, I agreed with none of the lines of the Catechism you quoted.

Posted by EloiseA (# 18029) on :

No problem Le Roc, thousands, even millions don't!

Posted by daronmedway (# 3012) on :

quote:
Originally posted by mousethief:

quote:
Originally posted by W Hyatt:

quote:
Originally posted by Russ:
But what does it mean to love God ?
It's not a matter of forcing ourselves to feel some emotion towards God, it's enough to compel ourselves to keep his commandments. Doing a search for "love" and "commandments" shows that the two are frequently linked explicitly:

From the New Testament:

"If you love Me, you will keep My commandments."
This quickly becomes circular. What does it mean to love God? To keep his commandments. What are the greatest commandments? To love God and to love others. Wait, what does it mean to love God? To keep his commandments. Which commandments? Well, to start out, the commandment to love God. Which means what?

I trust you see the problem?

I see the problem. ISTM the solution is that obedience is a consequence of love, not the measure of it. Love is always prior, obedience always subsequent. Love is freely poured into our hearts by the Holy Spirit; we then obey God in response to the gracious priority of that love. Obedience is the fruit of love, not the substance of it.

Posted by W Hyatt (# 14250) on :

Obedience is not the measure of love, it's the way we exercise our free will and commit ourselves to giving God permission to change our hearts.

Posted by Horseman Bree (# 5290) on :

The "Love" in the two Great Commandments implies putting the needs, hopes, wants of the Other before what you need/hope/want for yourself.

In the case of your Love of God, this means always considering what he has asked or commanded before you hare off to do something which would be displeasing to Him. This includes worship, although He is not particularly pleased with too much reliance on forms of worship which tend towards strengthening authoritarianism in the Church or towards making the simple attitude of adoration and thanksgiving to be forced into negative displays of "Look at me!"

Similarly, one must always consider what is happening to your neighbour before commencing actions which might affect him/her. This would have to include always questioning the actions and decisions of those in "authority"; always looking for unintended consequences; and always looking out for the needs of those who can't (quite) manage on their own.

So "Do not commit adultery" involves thinking about the damage that the act may do to the relationship between the other parties involved, and allowing that consideration to rule your impulses.

"Do not covet" or steal becomes "how does the other person feel about losing something that matters to him/her?" - IOW having some understanding of the other person.

"Do not bear false witness" would include not putting words into God's mouth or misreading the Bible to justify your faulty reasoning, since both God and your neighbour are affected by this.

Following the Two Great Commandments thoughtfully supersedes all the detail rules, since decisions made in the light of the Two will always cover the negative things that the rules only partially deal with. You won't want to break the rules if you have the Good Attitude (which ISTM is what Jesus said).

Posted by daronmedway (# 3012) on :

quote:
Originally posted by W Hyatt:
Obedience is not the measure of love, it's the way we exercise our free will and commit ourselves to giving God permission to change our hearts.

I'm not sure that God needs permission to do that.

Posted by W Hyatt (# 14250) on :

I am.

Posted by Russ (# 120) on :

quote:
Originally posted by EloiseA:

2. Why did God make you?

God made me to know Him, love Him and serve Him...

I was hoping that after that you'd get to one which says what it means to love Him.

If what it amounts to is doing what you imagine will please Him, then perhaps it's not surprising that it seems to mean very different things to different people...

Best wishes,

Russ

Posted by W Hyatt (# 14250) on :

Isn't what it would have meant to the original audience the important part of the question? I'm pretty sure the concept originally would have involved loyalty more than emotion.

Posted by mousethief (# 953) on :

quote:
Originally posted by daronmedway:

quote:
Originally posted by W Hyatt:
Obedience is not the measure of love, it's the way we exercise our free will and commit ourselves to giving God permission to change our hearts.
I'm not sure that God needs permission to do that.

quote:
Originally posted by W Hyatt:
I am.

I'd say not that he NEEDS permission to do that, but willingly waits for permission to do that. He could ride roughsod over our choices and will, but chooses not to. But this then becomes the old nag of predestination versus free will.

Posted by W Hyatt (# 14250) on :

I agree, he doesn't "need" to in the sense of being constrained by anything - he willingly waits because it's the loving and wise thing to do. But how does it become predestination versus free will?

Posted by mousethief (# 953) on :

quote:
Originally posted by W Hyatt:
I agree, he doesn't "need" to in the sense of being constrained by anything - he willingly waits because it's the loving and wise thing to do. But how does it become predestination versus free will?

Because a predestinarian would say God doesn't wait, he just barges in and changes our hearts without our acquiescence, which we're too weak to give because of sin.

Posted by W Hyatt (# 14250) on :

I can't say that I've ever been able to understand arguments for predestination over free will. It seems to me that if God were willing to change us without our permission because we're just too weak or sinful to exercise our free will and actually give him our permission, then he would be even more willing to protect us from our fallen nature just enough so that we can make a free choice, which is exactly what I think he does do.

Posted by EloiseA (# 18029) on :

Hi Russ, you commented:

"I was hoping that after that you'd get to one which says what it means to love Him.

If what it amounts to is doing what you imagine will please Him, then perhaps it's not surprising that it seems to mean very different things to different people..."

What helped me was understanding from very early on that to love God is bound up with knowing God and serving God. Yes, pleasing God, certainly.

I don't think even the most lucid nutshell definition from the Penny Catechism is going to begin to enter into the mystery of why and how God loves us, and what it means to love God in return. That is the great numinous mystery probably unanswered in this lifetime.

Posted by daronmedway (# 3012) on :

quote:
Originally posted by W Hyatt:
I can't say that I've ever been able to understand arguments for predestination over free will. It seems to me that if God were willing to change us without our permission because we're just too weak or sinful to exercise our free will and actually give him our permission, then he would be even more willing to protect us from our fallen nature just enough so that we can make a free choice, which is exactly what I think he does do.

Thing is, parents do all kind of loving acts for their children without seeking their permission first. The extent of a child's indignation over having their free-will disregarded is no real measure of how loving and ultimately good the parent's intervention really is. In fact, it's perfectly possible for a good parent to do something loving for their child which positively goes against their child's will.

Posted by daronmedway (# 3012) on :

quote:
Originally posted by mousethief:

quote:
Originally posted by W Hyatt:
I agree, he doesn't "need" to in the sense of being constrained by anything - he willingly waits because it's the loving and wise thing to do. But how does it become predestination versus free will?
Because a predestinarian would say God doesn't wait, he just barges in and changes our hearts without our acquiescence, which we're too weak to give because of sin.

That would a 'hard' definition of predestination. Isn't it possible that God might grant his Spirit to a person in order that they might choose to love what they might ordinarily regard as worthless or simply be incapable of loving? I gave love to my children before they were capable of reciprocation; I - in a sense - granted my spirit to them so that in receiving my love they might grow in their capacity to love. And that giving of love on my part was at least in part given so that they might love me in return. Why? Because something in me tells me that love begets love.

[ 13. November 2014, 08:25: Message edited by: daronmedway ]

Posted by daronmedway (# 3012) on :

quote:
Originally posted by W Hyatt:
I agree, he doesn't "need" to in the sense of being constrained by anything - he willingly waits because it's the loving and wise thing to do.

Apply that reasoning to a parent-child relationship. Passively waiting for my new-born child to express love to me without first loving that child lavishly and unconditionality would not be loving and wise. It would horrifically cold and calculating.

[ 13. November 2014, 09:40: Message edited by: daronmedway ]

Posted by Gamaliel (# 812) on :

I don't think any Christian tradition doesn't teach or accept that 'we love him because he first loved us.'

I think there's some cross-purposes talk going on here.

What daronmedway is saying holds whether we are predestinarians in the Augustinian/... eventually Calvinist sense or otherwise.

Posted by Evensong (# 14696) on :

quote:
Originally posted by Russ:
I guess most here are familiar with the bit in Mark ch 12 where Jesus says that the two meta-commandments are to love God and love neighbour.

But what does it mean to love God ?

There are quite a few Greek words for love but only one in the English language. I always find it helpful to look back to the Greek and see which instance is being used.

Here the root is Agape.

William Barclay's New Testament Words is brilliant. Here's what he says about agape.

Not sure if that link is going to work so here's the long and short of it from my hardcopy:

quote:
Agape has to do with mind: it is not simply an emotion which rises unbidden in our hearts: it is a principle by which we deliberately live. Agape has supremely to do with the will. It is a conquest, a victory, and achievement. No one ever naturally loved his enemies. To love one's enemies is a conquest of all our natural inclinations and emotions.

This agape, this Christian love, is not merely an emotional experience which comes to us unbidden and unsought; it is a deliberate principle of the mind, and a deliberate conquest and achievement of the will. It is in fact the power to love the unlovable, to love people who we do not like. pg21

In the context of agape towards God. Interesting question.

It is usually about putting the best for the other (our neighbour) foremost.

I'm thinking it has to do with will obviously. And this will has to do with trusting God which is the basis of faith. And to do with thinking and acting with God in mind in all we do.

Posted by Erroneous Monk (# 10858) on :

I'm always challenged by the fact that we're told that the second most important commandment "resembles the first."

Is this resemblance just the structure of the commandment, or that both are commandments to love something/someone?

Or is the resemblance more significant than that? My experience of (doing my poor best at) loving my neighbour and loving God are actually very different. In practice, loving a human you are close to is about showing lots and lots and lots of mercy, even if you don't get it back. Loving God doesn't require us to forgive Him, does it? It's meant to start with the belief that He is inherently lovable.

It's like the two loves use completely different muscles.

What am I getting wrong here?

Posted by W Hyatt (# 14250) on :

quote:
Originally posted by daronmedway:

quote:
Originally posted by W Hyatt:
I agree, he doesn't "need" to in the sense of being constrained by anything - he willingly waits because it's the loving and wise thing to do.
Apply that reasoning to a parent-child relationship. Passively waiting for my new-born child to express love to me without first loving that child lavishly and unconditionality would not be loving and wise. It would horrifically cold and calculating.

Of course it would be, but that's not applying the same reasoning because I'm not suggesting that God waits to actively love us, only that he waits to change us.

quote:
Originally posted by daronmedway:
Thing is, parents do all kind of loving acts for their children without seeking their permission first. The extent of a child's indignation over having their free-will disregarded is no real measure of how loving and ultimately good the parent's intervention really is. In fact, it's perfectly possible for a good parent to do something loving for their child which positively goes against their child's will.

Sure, I agree with all that, and I do think God is constantly doing things for us, but against our will. But we, as parents, don't have the power to change our children's hearts, and it's generally considered bad parenting to try to change our adult children into something they don't want to be. The loving and wise thing to do is accept who they've chosen to be and work to build the best relationship possible given their choice.

If you could change your children's hearts to make them better people, would you do so even if they don't want you to? If I could do that, I'd wait until they were absolutely certain it's what they wanted, with no room left for a later change of mind.

And if God can change our heart, why would he do so without our permission rather than first making sure that we're not overwhelmed by our natural inclinations and that we're in a position to choose freely?

Posted by W Hyatt (# 14250) on :

quote:
Originally posted by Erroneous Monk:
Or is the resemblance more significant than that?

One possibility is that we can't do anything directly for God, but we can contribute toward whatever purpose he had for Creation by taking care of it the best we can, which primarily means taking care of other people and treating them well.

Posted by mousethief (# 953) on :

The problem with predestination is not God loving us first. It's God loving some of us and not others, when none of us can (according to the predestinarians) accept his love. But there you go.

Posted by cliffdweller (# 13338) on :

quote:
Originally posted by W Hyatt:
Obedience is not the measure of love, it's the way we exercise our free will and commit ourselves to giving God permission to change our hearts.

I would say it's the product of love-- and trust. If we love God, if we trust God, we will naturally obey his commands as the natural byproduct of that love and trust.

Posted by W Hyatt (# 14250) on :

Yes, I agree, it is a product of love and trust. However, that doesn't help someone who knows they're supposed to love God but also knows they feel nothing toward God. The important question here, I think, is what are we supposed to do to respond to the Biblical exhortation to love God? And I would say that the answer is that we are to compel ourselves to obey his commandments because it's the right thing to do. Then, as we constantly give God our permission, in the form of our self-compelled obedience, to gradually change us, we can hope to eventually get to the point where our obedience stems from love and trust.

Our obedience doesn't merit us anything, but I see it as something God requires of us as a way for us to completely and continually commit ourselves to accepting the transformation he offers us.

Posted by cliffdweller (# 13338) on :

As others have noted, the Bible rarely uses "love" to express a feeling, so yes, thinking of "loving God" as some emotion we have to drum up is not particularly helpful. The psalmists frequently seem to be either pissed off at God or bewildered by his apparent absence, so again, their example would suggest it's not all about the warm fuzzies.

I find sometimes you just find yourself "acting as if it were so". You don't feel particularly loving, you don't know if you really believe all the things the love would be predicated on, but you "act as if" simply because you want it to be so. I find this is true sometimes in marriage, for example. And the lovely thing is, often if you "act as if" after awhile, you learn that "it is"-- the love that so eluded you before is now suddenly, just as inexplicably, there. And partly that's because you took a risk-- and it paid off. Love is always a risk, and that holds true experientially even with God. Maybe even more so because the stakes are even higher if he lets us down. But we find ourselves wanting so much for all this Christianity stuff to be true that we find ourselves, almost w/o willing or deciding it, acting as if it were true. And somewhere along the way, we (perhaps) discover that it's no longer playacting. Somewhere along the way as we took a chance, a risk, we found God. And the feeling/ obedience/ motives that were gone before are now there.

Posted by W Hyatt (# 14250) on :

Well that's a way to put it that I'm happy to agree with - well said.

Posted by daronmedway (# 3012) on :

I still maintain that obedience is the effect of love, not the essence of love. The natural objection to this view, as you express, is that it tends to invalidate those acts of obedience to God that do not directly arise from a direct and experiential sense of love for God. But I think it's true nevertheless.

So what if you don't feel any experiential love for God? I'd suggest that we would have no desire to obey God - save for the false motive of getting something from him in return - unless one does in fact have a very real love for God.. I'd therefore suggest that the very desire to experience love for God, is a form of love in and of itself. In other words, the desire to love God is love itself experienced in the form of anticipation. That's why it is so painful.

Posted by Gamaliel (# 812) on :

Not all predestinationist types are double-predestinationists, Mousethief, as you are well aware.

That doesn't remove all the issues, though.

Posted by Russ (# 120) on :

quote:
Originally posted by W Hyatt:
that doesn't help someone who knows they're supposed to love God but also knows they feel nothing toward God. The important question here, I think, is what are we supposed to do to respond to the Biblical exhortation to love God? And I would say that the answer is that we are to compel ourselves to obey his commandments because it's the right thing to do.

My sense of the context is that "love God" is supposed to sum up, unify, cast light on, our duties in respect of God, in the same way that "love of neighbour" sort of lurks behind all the specific injunctions to not steal from him, lie to him, etc.

Interpreting "love God" as a footnote to all the other commandments (such as adding that they should be obeyed willingly, or enthusiastically) doesn't quite fit the bill. It doesn't fulfil the same role.

Best wishes,

Russ

Posted by W Hyatt (# 14250) on :

quote:
Originally posted by daronmedway:
I still maintain that obedience is the effect of love, not the essence of love.

Thanks for your thoughtful reply. I agree that obedience is not the essence of love - I see it as being the pathway God provides for us that leads us to love. Then at the end of the path, it becomes an effect of love.

[ 15. November 2014, 05:53: Message edited by: W Hyatt ]

Posted by Dafyd (# 5549) on :

quote:
Originally posted by Russ:
Some people seem to think love of neighbour is love of God, so that the first meta-commandment is redundant and in practice there is only the second.

I tend to the view that it means love of beauty, justice, truth - the attributes of God - for their own sake (whether it pleases your neighbour or not), but that doesn't seem totally satisfactory.

I'm not sure that you can separate out loving God from believing in God. Faith, hope, and charity are I think interdependent.

I'd be inclined to think that loving God means that there is a connection between these two things: between love of one's neighbour and love of beauty and truth and goodness. Holding that one's neighbour is lovable (not only pitiable or deserving of kindness or compassion) because they are created by the source of all that is lovable.
Believing in that connection is perhaps closer to faith or hope, but I think they are largely linked.

UBB.classic^TM 6.5.0