Re: [TruthTalk] re: the contraints of love

[Judith H Taylor]

 

 

On Sat, 04 Feb 2006 12:13:02 +0000 [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:

 

I have been a little surprised at the resistance of some to the idea that God is obligated to a particular course of action.   Paul speaks of being “constrained by love”  and even goes so far as to give definition to the action of love  (I Cor 13: 4-7), suggesting that if “love” is to prevail,  his defining must be in evidence.   Love functions under the same constraints regardless of who is the functionary.  We have not reason to believe otherwise.    "God is love" must mean, then, that Paul’s definition is drawn from his view of this fact  [God is love.]   What other authority would exist in the mind of Paul?   Further, if, indeed, God is love, community is required and God HAD to be a creator God.  I say this because the defining of love is meaningless without community. 

 

jt:  Could it possibly be JD that God has a different definition than you?

 

Further  [as a side-bar],   God cannot create Himself.   Consequently, all creaturely beings that God created are less than Himself in terms of both immanence and economy and   “…….all   …..  are falling short of His glory “  is a given, is it not?   God as a redeemer is forever a statement of immanence!!   There is little difference between angels and mankind.   Both have made decisions that are poorly advised.

 

jt: I would say that there is quite a bit of difference between angels and mankind; they were a higher order before the birth, death and resurrection of Christ.  Man was lower than the unfallen angels. 

 

Satan came from one of these decisions  -- and the hordes that followed him.   The bible is not about a discussion of the angelic world, except as it relates to ours. But it is apparent that theirs is no more a robotic existence than ours.   If angels no longer “fall away,”  what happened in terms of the redeeming activity of God?     Their story is, yet , untold. 

 

jt: Satan himself made that decision and so did the angels who chose to fall away with him.. What makes you think angels no longer "fall away"  Where would you find the basis for such a belief?

 

Back to the subject at hand  -------   redemption is an assignment borne out of necessity on the part of God.   In Hebrews 2:17   (“… therefore He had to become like His brothers and sisters in every respect…”),  obligation is a function of the Greek wording in that text.  

 

jt: God is not Greek, neither is he obligated to anyone in any way; I would never believe that he acted out of obligation.  Love is a choice.

 

We only know of the requirements of Divine Intervention through revelation  (as expressed in Hebrews 2:17 and Acts 2:28 for example).  But that God as a being of love is required to function in a given manner is not an idea to be ignored.& nbsp;  If God cannot choose to sin  (James 1:13) , why would be think that He cannot choose to act  as love is revealed in scripture?    If He is free to be what He is , then, He must be that way !!   And we can take confidence in the notion that God does not change.   He does not change because He cannot change.   We make God a creature if we think otherwise. 

 

jt: He can and will judge sin; He has done it and will do it and that will look like evil to some, in fact God

Himself calls it that at least once when he repented of the evil he planned to bring upon a nation.

 

jd