A STUNNINGLY simple question about JOHN 3:16 "For God so Loved the world."

by Terry 384 Replies latest watchtower beliefs

Meeting Junkie No More

Thanks for the read, Burn. I guess it all comes down to whether or not you take the first 11 chapters of Genesis literally or not. If Adam literally existed as God's first creation (in 4026 BC or thereabouts) and brought sin into the world, then all these convoluted explanations are invoked to explain why God had to 'redeem' mankind.
If, on the other hand, the first 11 chapters are all allegorical, (seeing that science is telling us men have been on this planet for a lot longer than 6,000+ years), then Jesus' raison d'etre makes no sense, except also in an allegorical sense. I am of the view that we need Jesus desperately, allegorically. But literally, I don't accept that God had to 'sacrifice' his Son for our sins. That's leftover Judaic baggage, wrapped in a Christian New Testament, probably a Catholic Church construct....
That's just my 2cents. Thanks for the reply.
Meeting Junkie No More

Burn;
I was posting at the same time you were, so didn't get to read your subsequent post, until after I had posted mine. You know, I want to believe all the things you are saying. It is very true that we show our love sometimes most by what we are willing to sacrifice, so, allegorically I agree with just about everything you set out. I just don't take the whole thing literally. We're probably on the same page but can't actually say so in WORDS! Love also cannot be explained in WORDS. GOD IS LOVE - I surely believe that!
BurnTheShips

If one of my sons became a child molester I could no longer value my relationship with them. I would, if the situation arose, have to turn them in to authorities to stop them. I'd try and discover why--if there was a reason to be had--they had done such a horrible deed. If, one of my sons had murdered a child---I'd be heart broken and inconsolable. But, if they were sentenced to death for it---I would certainly understand the basis for that judgment. I could not witness the event under any circumstances. I really don't know how I would find the strength to continue my own life under such circumstances. Perhaps only by thinking of what I still had to offer those who remained.
If my son went so far astray I would still love him, and value my relationship with him because I would still be his Father. If such a situation arose, I would require he be submitted to justice-- as you would--and turn him in to the authorities for the penalty. I'd be heartbroken too, but if there was a way to get justice while sparing him, and heal him of his fatal flaw, I would do that too. If doing the time and sitting in the electric chair would spare his life and simultaneously give him the lesson he needs to fly straight for the rest of his days, I would do this. I love my son. I sense that you would love your son enough to do the same, if it was a possibility. Our love is but a shadow.
God loves us. He bore the sentence and the execution for his wayward sons. Us.
God is Soverign? Yes, but, this is not a basis for Justice when there was no basis for condemning those who had NOT YET been born.
All that are born of original sin suffer from the lack of holiness inherited from our progenitors. God's justice will not allow us to be in communion with him if we are not holy. Only that which is holy can be in the sacred relationship with God. Also, not only are all humans born with this lack of holiness, all humans, without exception, actually sin as well. So it is not unjust for God to judge the unborn as being unholy, because it would be the immutable nature of all those yet to be born to be unholy without further action by God himself to correct this.
I'll grant you God has a basis in Justice for CONDEMNING humanity.
Yes.
What I am asking you is: ON WHAT BASIS DOES GOD LOWER HIS STANDARD and start LOVING these undeserving souls enough to want to allow his PERFECT son, Jesus, to suffer and die although innocent?
I don't need a basis to love my son. I assume you do not either, since you state that you would be disconsolate to the end of your days if your beloved boy stood (rightfully) accused of a heinous crime. God doesn't need a basis to love us criminals either. He loved us from the beginning, and will until the end. There isn't a reason. Love just is. That is the limit of Reason. I asked you if you loved your son. You say yes. I am asking you to prove to me you love your son. Scientifically.
If you need a just basis for condemnation you need a just basis for eliminating your perfect standard and lifting the burden of human nature.
We are condemned by justice (just basis). We are saved from the result of that just condemnation, not by justice (just basis), but by mercy and love.
BurnTheShips
BurnTheShips

a universe composed of elementary objects that move around in an otherwise empty void. I call this atomic reality.
These are elementary objects that are indeterministic, and may not all be detectable to human science. Does it exist if science can't see it? It can. But I can say the same of God.
Where arguments are made that Western science tells us nothing of deep significance, I assert that it remains our foremost tool for the discovery of fundamental truth.
Some truths, sure.
Burn
trevor

This has been is long and interesting debate but at the same time tedious. I am amazed at the way such obviously intelligent minds can spend so much energy and thought on a fictional scenario.
Then again I sense a clash of egos that feel a need to demonstrate their sense of self and grow bigger through triumphing over each other.
Some can’t resist taking the bait and others love to dangle the bait.
It is all great entertainment and I would love to offer more than my original few comments at the beginning of this thread but my ego is at rest. Without an active and hungry ego the whole attempt at justifying or trashing the Biblical story of Adam & Eve, balanced against Jesus and his controlling God, becomes amusing.
Trevor
jwblog

The sun rises in the morning for the good and for the wicked. The rain falls upon the earth for the good and for the wicked. Good and bad have been allowed to walk side by side for a period of time until The Almighty takes control and the son reigns as king.
Jesus was born with out sin because he had the laws of his Father with him. Adam had God with him in the beginning, chose to break the law therefore became a sinner. It must mean sin is without law. That would explain how an innocent child is born a sinner, becuase he is born without the laws of the Father.
The spirit creation in the heavens chose to rebel, men upon the earth chose wickedness. Without law there exists disorder. If disorder prevails the Almighty God has to uphold the law through discipline. We as human have lost loved one in death. It was loving of the Almighty to offer his son up as a ransom and also loving of Christ to accept his path. The greatest of love is when one is willing to offer their life up on behalf of another.
GOD gave us life and the opportunity for everlasting life, is this not love?
lalliv01

God ___gave____but got back what He gave.
Yes, Jesus returned whence he came but more than Jesus human existence was sacrificed. Just like the case of first Adam,God could have provided the second Adam, Jesus, with a perfect mate created from one of his, Jesus', ribs. So, when Jesus died so did all those human lifes he could have sired. Imagine a world where perfect humans would be living alongside us, imperfect children of the first Adam.
So we can say that an entire race of humans, the children that Jesus could have sired, were sacrificed to ransom us, the imperfect children of Adam.
Somehow, that doesn't seem just, does it? I guess the would-be descendents of Jesus already had their armageddon, back in 33 C.E.
Terry

I don't need a basis to love my son. I assume you do not either, since you state that you would be disconsolate to the end of your days if your beloved boy stood (rightfully) accused of a heinous crime. God doesn't need a basis to love us criminals either.
The basis for LOVE is value.
Love does not (and cannot) exist APART FROM value.
A value is either imputed (you project it out onto something) or inherent (it is intrinsic to the nature).
Let's go simple.
Water.
We are mostly comprised of water. Without water we cease to exist. We perish without access to water. Right?
Water=Life.
What about water that has been polluted, then? (Can you tell an analogy is coming up?)
Poisoned water is useless to humans as a means of supporting life.
Would you value poisoned water THE SAME as you did fresh water?
No!
Here comes the analogy.
You can't LOVE your (polluted, poisoned) son the same as a non child molesting no murdering son. You'd be imputing value to him on a basis rooted in a past context and not a current one or future one.
Meaning what?
The engine driving VALUE is the fundamental way to understand the emotion of LOVE.
You are asserting (imputing) value to a son when his state-of-being (actual value) is no more based on the resonance of a past status and not a present of future one.
Consequently, what you view as LOVE is nothing more or less than a deliberate self-blindess. It has no basis in fact.
I'm trying to explain this rationally to you. You are responding emotionally and ignoring the actual basis for emotionas which is VALUE driven.
As status changes, value changes. As value changes, emotion driven value must change.
I feel like I've been over and over this and I'll bet you feel the same way.
YOU'RE ASSERTING a ridiculous situation in which God doesn't have a basis for His actions rooted in reality.
Things are what they are. To treat them otherwise is to act delusionally.
The basis for God's desire to have man conform to a Righteous Standard is to bring man into alignment with an ACTUAL state of being.
Otherwise, neither man's status (in God's eyes) or the reality of man's actions has any import whatsoever. This would nullify the legal Justice of God's condemnation of man IN THE FIRST PLACE.
If God condems based on a reality and status quo, then, God must exonerate the same way.
Can't you recognize that? Otherwise, God is guilty of using crooked scales of Justice "rigged" for exculpation.
BurnTheShips

A value is either imputed (you project it out onto something) or inherent (it is intrinsic to the nature).
Is love ever intrinsic? (Burn asks himself).
I suppose love is always imputed.
I love my son no matter what. So do you.
BTS
Terry

A value is either imputed (you project it out onto something) or inherent (it is intrinsic to the nature).
Is love ever intrinsic? (Burn asks himself).
I suppose love is always imputed.
I love my son no matter what. So do you.
Love is the strongest possible emotion based on your strongest POSITIVE VALUES.
When the thing loved changes from valuable to value-less what happens?
Think of it this way.
A health inspector's job is to test the quality of products to insure the high safety standards which protect the consumer.
A conscientious and intellectually honest inspector would PASS food, for example, that met standards and FAIL food which was infected.
You have a similar duty to yourself and your integrity which maintains your MORALITY.
You only remain a person of ethics and morality when you MAINTAIN your standards.
If you turn the other way just because somebody you are related to is involved there is a breech of honesty in your value system.
I know what I am saying here is hard for you to hear and accept. But, if you will consider the merit of it--you'll have to agree.
LOVE is either honest or it is dishonest.
That is why perfectly good people end up destroying their lives; they breech proper standards because they fail to call evil for what it is.
Love is state of the art. It cannot lapse into a "given."
Love, to be the highest value, must honestly reflect the reality of the highest value in truth.
Sanity tells us there is NO SUCH THING as UNconditional love.
It is a lie of the worst morality.

A STUNNINGLY simple question about JOHN 3:16 "For God so Loved the world."

Share this