Tec - you do realise that the definition of love is malleable? When you claim something is loving and something is not you are merely rehearsing your opinion rather than saying anything concrete. Let me give you an example. To you it is loving for your Christ to take part in a pre determined blood sacrifice that has involved millions (?) of preceding animal sacrifices akin to voodoo ( blood scattered around and wiped on things etc.) To me that 'loving' behaviour reminds me of the worst kinds of psychopathic human behaviour. My personal morality is appalled at a god who requires love of himself, who preaches the golden rule but doesn't live it, who takes the role of judge but is utterly unaccountable itself, who is atrocious at clear communication and requires faith ( blind obedience ) , who is displeased with the results of a garden fruit transgression such that he curses the earth and women for it such that childbirth is bloody, terrifying and painful, I am at odds with the love of a deity who avoids giving any useful facts , information, physics, medical or social guidance that works ( spit magic is all very 'amazing' but he could have saved billions if he'd explained germ theory) , I don't think a deity who kills and maims to get his point across ( flood and Armageddon) is very deserving of adoration - pant wetting fear maybe, love nope ; seems to like bronze age warfare with swords ( his chosen people were always off conquering and enslaving at his word ) and can't organise his teachings into a simple yet liveable set of rules leading to clear ways to live.
Christ is a disorganised, lazy, mumbling, bumbling concept of hate and guilt who is almost 2000 years late for a 6 billion corpse war he and his angels are straining at the leash to begin when big Daddy says 'go', he is a tyrant who allows no dissent, no freedom, no independent thought( reference our earlier discussion Tec , I hope you realise how scary and tragic it is when you speak about thought modification as you do ) and who uses the notion of eternal death/ hell or punishment as the price of his benevolence. Christ is not love and is a metaphor for staggering intellectual indulgence in fairytales and in modern days a super logic tool to allow rejection of the bible ( of course it took the scientists, atheists and heretics to point out the impossibility of the bible - god/ Christ never bothered to keep his manual up to date and clear of crap ) and to allow unsupportable arguments ( like Jesus is against slavery .)
When I look back through the vast numbers of belief v skeptic debates ( here and elsewhere ) I cannot find one useful, factual or intellectually enhancing moral teaching that is a preserve of Christ but I find page after page of careful, referenced, practical, life enhancing illustrations of man's achievements. Mankind's love has done more than Christ's love on every measurable count. If I wish to speak in grandiloquent phrases I would say this:
Christ has done less for mankind than the lowliest free thinker, the poorest paid lab technician, the Nazarene has done less for peace, equal rights and tolerance than a black girl on a bus, a parliament that banned slavery and a man standing arms raised against a line of tanks, the Lamb of Israel is a proxy for hate, patriarchalism, racism, genocide and slavery.
Apparently the real motivation for dying on the cross was not altruistic salvation ( only a few get that ), it was a power play to gain a crown.
You Tec are superior in every possible way to the icon you worship. If you wish to promote love then that is worthy of doing; look within not up, you have more intrinsic love than any external 'power' can inject into you. There is no need to sell yourself out, you, me, everyone has the capacity for love and greatness without the need of a puppeteer. Go be magnificent.