god is love

Originally posted by whodey
My paster gave me a new perspective... Food for thought.

Pasta?

Originally posted by knightmeister
[b]You can only learn to love others unconditionally if you love yourself unconditionally first

Supposing that's true, do you have any suggestions on how to develop unconditional love for myself?

Originally posted by whodey
I wish that were true, vistesd, but is it true? I suppose I could also convince myself that I have just won $100.000.000.000 but is that true as well? I can't help but wonder how many people form their theology around the way they want things to be rather than the way it actually is. I think we have all been guilty of this to some degree including myself a ...[text shortened]... from them. So in the end, does God simply forsake this free will and force himself upon them?

I can't help but wonder how many people form their theology around the way they want things to be rather than the way it actually is. I think we have all been guilty of this to some degree including myself at times.

It may well be inescapable, no matter how much vigilance we try to exercise. I think that those who cling to the black/white, pardoned/condemned juridical model of salvation, in the face of both scripture and tradition, do exactly that too.

Some comments from another thread:

________________________________

There seem to be three theories of salvation (at least that I have found thus far):

(1) The eternal pardon/condemnation model. Though popular, it is both scripturally suspect (as the DeRose article cited below argues closely) and appears not to have been the prominent understanding of the early church. I have difficulty seeing this model as either loving or just.

(2) The pardon/correction model, in which “hell” represents a non-eternal stage of “just punishment,” of sentencing that fits the crime and/or disciplinary requirements. Clement of Alexandria (2nd century) seems to have held this view.

(3) The model of salvation as healing, based as I have said, at least in part on the fact that the root meaning of soterias (salvation) is to make well, to make whole, to cure, to heal. Gregory of Nyssa (4th century) and Isaac of Syria (7th century) are two patristic saints who held this view. For Isaac it is the “fire of agape” itself that is the curative agent, rather like radiation therapy...

This last model is prominent in the Eastern churches. In it, God is the healer who does not refuse to heal, and acts until all are healed. Sin reflects spiritual illness rather than wickedness, per se. Judging is not so much a “judicial” concept as it is to decide, select, determine (all meanings of the Greek krino) the best treatment, as a medical doctor does.

Also, as Olivier Clement noted, this model reflects that the “wheat and tares,” and the “sheep and goats” are metaphors for characteristics of the individual human being—and that the former parable, at least, cannot reasonably be read otherwise.

There’s a lot more to it of course: how it all meshes with Christology, for example; the doctrine of sanctification, etc.

Both models (2) and (3) affirm that God does, in fact save; and neither one assumes that death is the bar beyond which God cannot act. In model (1), God either (a) chooses not to save, or (b) fails to save, at least some.

____________________________________

I remain convinced that the particularly western juridical model of salvation is simply wrong, on a number of grounds, most of which I have articulated more than once in recent weeks. I am more convinced of the arguments from scripture for an ultimate universal salvation (with, for purposes of this thread anyway, the possibility of an intervening “hell” ) than I was before.* I am finding that historically this has been not such a minority stream in Christendom as I had thought: it is both broad and ancient.

* See No.1 Marauder’s and my posts at the top of page 3 of the “God Fails at Salvation?” thread, and read the essay cited at http://pantheon.yale.edu/%7Ekd47/univ.htm#1.

This has led me to a lot of other sources.

_______________________________

I understand the theological problems you mentioned. My particular view is that "sin" is rooted in illusion, and that it is more like an illness than a rebellion. The allegory of the "fall" certainly supports that view; as does the fact that both the Hebrew and Greek words translated as "sin" fundamentally mean failure or error.

Originally posted by vistesd
[b]I can't help but wonder how many people form their theology around the way they want things to be rather than the way it actually is. I think we have all been guilty of this to some degree including myself at times.

It may well be inescapable, no matter how much vigilance we try to exercise. I think that those who cling to the black/white, pardone ...[text shortened]... both the Hebrew and Greek words translated as "sin" fundamentally mean failure or error.[/b]

#3 is an interesting take on things. Would you care to expand on that a little more? Do you know of any early christian sects that took that view, or of any early christian writings that endorse it?

Originally posted by rwingett
#3 is an interesting take on things. Would you care to expand on that a little more? Do you know of any early christian sects that took that view, or of any early christian writings that endorse it?

The earliest I have found so far is St. Gregory of Nyssa (4th century). I am still researching. Probably his contemporaries Basil the Great and Gregory of Nanzianzus held the same, or a similar, view. St. Isaac the Syrian was 7th century. These were not “fringe” people, however (they are all saints of the Eastern Orthodox Church). Olivier Clement is a prominent Greek Orthodox theologian who supports this view.

Clement, who seems to have held #2, was 2nd century (140-220 C.E.); Origen and Irenaeus (both 2nd century) also held views of universal salvation (but I am not sure how they articulated it).

According to the wiki article on the subject, four of the six theological schools of “ancient Christendom” [probably 2nd to 7th or 9th centuries] taught some form of ultimate universal salvation.

As I say, I am still researching...

Ok, I think I've found my starting point for how to love everyone. I know this might sound obvious, but I'm going to try to be as much of a good bloke as I can to the people around me. I've been doing it for a couple of days and it feels good to be nice.

Self- monitoring of one's inner anger, fear and other emotions is very important for this, because you can't be a really good bloke without understanding and accepting your own feelings.