What emotions can God experience?

Originally posted by Pawnokeyhole
So, is that it then? Every theist here believes that God does not feel emotion?

What a lacklustre God that is!

I can't speak for the other four theists on here. Our emotions, however, were given to us as a way of having kinship with God's experience. Thumbnail sketches--- of sorts--- of the real masterpiece.

Originally posted by Pawnokeyhole
Do all theists agree that God does not emote?

Didn't He say, "Jacob have I loved, but Esau I have hated"?

Yes. I read that too in the Bible.

So I believe that Jacob has God loved and Esau has God hated just as He said.

Does that present a problem to you?

Originally posted by jaywill
Yes. I read that too in the Bible.

So I believe that Jacob has God loved and Esau has God hated just as He said.

Does that present a problem to you?

I am just interested in finding out about the nature of your beliefs.

FreakyKBH evidently disagrees with you that God is capable of emotion. According to him, God does something else, that is like emoting, but not close enough to it to be actually called emoting, in the fully-fledged sense. Let's call this emoting*.

So, according to him God loves* me or hates* me, but doesn't love or hate me.

Do you think God just loves or hates me, in a way I can directly understand?

Originally posted by Pawnokeyhole
I am just interested in finding out about the nature of your beliefs.

FreakyKBH evidently disagrees with you that God is capable of emotion. According to him, God does something else, that is like emoting, but not close enough to it to be actually called emoting, in the fully-fledged sense. Let's call this emoting*.

So, according to him God loves* ...[text shortened]... ve or hate me.

Do you think God just loves or hates me, in a way I can directly understand?

I am reasonably sure that if Freaky and I were to discourse the matter we would probably be closer to agreement than to none agreement. But I will not presume to speak for Freaky.

As for my belief. Well, I really believe that God loves you.

But the human predicament is not a simple one. We have something about us which is lovable to God. For He created us and said that His creation was "very good". However the "very good" creation also became damaged and infested with God's enemy. So there is something lovable about us. Yet at the same time we have been damaged and there is something related to us which is hateful to God because it involves sin and death.

To make an analogy, (and few analogies are perfect), suppose you had a nice shiny radio. It played a very clear radio signal of either talking or music. Then suppose someone snatched it from you and hurled it into the gutter. After that it was muddy and instead of playing a clear station it buzzes with ugly static.

On one had you might love that radio. But at the same time you realize that it has become damaged goods. It doesn't function properly and has become defective. The defect and the damage you do not love. But the radio itself you love and seek to have it restored to its intended state.

So God loves us. Yet things related to us which have become a part of us, He does not love. Those things He hates.

So the Bible is the story of how God upholds His love for man at the same time as established His hatred for the sin in man. This is a divine dilemma for God. How can He love man yet still maintain His standard of righteousness and His hatred for the sin that has infested man.

The cross of Jesus Christ is the place where God's love for man and God's hated punishment for the sins of man work together.

I think you can rest in the knowledge that God does love you. But He hates the sin and the spiritual death that has infested your being. Fortunetly, He has a salvation for us in Jesus Christ.

Originally posted by Pawnokeyhole
I am just interested in finding out about the nature of your beliefs.

FreakyKBH evidently disagrees with you that God is capable of emotion. According to him, God does something else, that is like emoting, but not close enough to it to be actually called emoting, in the fully-fledged sense. Let's call this emoting*.

So, according to him God loves* ...[text shortened]... ve or hate me.

Do you think God just loves or hates me, in a way I can directly understand?

What God 'does' is not at all like emoting. What man is capable of experiencing is similar to what God is. For example, when we hear that God is love, it means love is what God is as well as what He does. Have you ever heard of a man being referred to as 'love?' Regardless of the strength of our personal convictions or desires, we are never called 'love.'

God's love exists with or without a created object, because God loves His own perfect righteousness and the perfect righteousness of the other members of the Trinity. His love today is the same as it was in eternity past. The variations we see described in the OT are simply written in such a way for the beginning reader to understand immediately the issues at hand. Language of accomodation.

Originally posted by FreakyKBH
What God 'does' is not at all like emoting. What man is capable of experiencing is similar to what God is. For example, when we hear that God is love, it means love is what God is as well as what He does. Have you ever heard of a man being referred to as 'love?' Regardless of the strength of our personal convictions or desires, we are nev ...[text shortened]... beginning reader to understand immediately the issues at hand. Language of accomodation.

Sounds pretty abstruse and incoherent to me.

Let's suppose God is love. Love is an abstraction. If God is an abstraction, how can he do anything? Only a concrete thing or person can do something.

And are you claiming now that God, never mind not emoting, does not even emote*, in some analogical sense? ["What God 'does' is not at all like emoting."].

A general problem with claiming that God does X*--where X* is not the same as, but only analogous to, the human X, and is ultimately incomprehensible to humans due to its *ness--is that it is impossible to characterize what "analogous" means.

Originally posted by jaywill
I am reasonably sure that if Freaky and I were to discourse the matter we would probably be closer to agreement than to none agreement. But I will not presume to speak for Freaky.

As for my belief. Well, I really believe that God loves you.

But the human predicament is not a simple one. We have something about us which is lovable to God. For He cr ...[text shortened]... ath that has infested your being. Fortunetly, He has a salvation for us in Jesus Christ.

At least you don't go in for obscurantism.

So, could you answer the very first post in this forum precisely?

Originally posted by Pawnokeyhole
Sounds pretty abstruse and incoherent to me.

Let's suppose God is love. Love is an abstraction. If God is an abstraction, how can he do anything? Only a concrete thing or person can do something.

And are you claiming now that God, never mind not emoting, does not even emote*, in some analogical sense? ["What God 'does' is [b]not at all like em ...[text shortened]... humans due to its *ness--is that it is impossible to characterize what "analogous" means.[/b]

Love is an abstraction.
Would energy fall into that category?

A general problem with claiming that God does X*--where X* is not the same as, but only analogous to, the human X, and is ultimately incomprehensible to humans due to its *ness--is that it is impossible to characterize what "analogous" means.
Not at all. When the Bible tells us to hunger and thirst after righteousness, the point of reference is something we experience (physical pain related to lack of food and drink) with something we should be experiencing. Man was given emotions in this fallen state in order for them to be used as a point of reference to help us know God's thoughts.

I think God knows ALL emotions we also have. We are created by his image remember ???

Originally posted by IthrowwithClocks
I think God knows ALL emotions we also have. We are created by his image remember ???

I agree.

The Bible seems to make a point even to the point of surprise.
He just is righteous in all of His doings.

Originally posted by FreakyKBH
The emotions so attributed to God in the OT are all part of the language of accomodation, using some known concept to explain an unknown concept.

I agree. I don't think God has emotions in the same way we do. Our emotions are biochemical based non-rational reactions to situations and experiences. Give a person the right drug, and he'll be a happy camper!

OTOH. I think the emotions ascribed to God in the bible are made to help us understand the actions of God, the consequences of sin, the consequences of God's grace and mercy.

God is an eternal immutable being. He doesn't "experience" emotions like we do. He is atemporal and omniscient - so "experience" does not apply to God.

When God loves someone - this means that God is going to save or protect that person. When God hates someone - it means that there is going to be a consequence for that persons sin.

We understand God has emotions only in an analogical sense - not a literal sense. God is also described as "turning his face", "moving his hand" and other bodily actions. But God does not have a body. So we understand these things to be metaphorical - not literal truths. They express real objective truths, but through metaphorical or analogical terms. So too are phrase regarding God's emotions.

Originally posted by Pawnokeyhole
At least you don't go in for obscurantism.

So, could you answer the very first post in this forum precisely?

God expresses many emotions. Does that answer your question?

Originally posted by jaywill
God expresses many emotions. Does that answer your question?

No. I ask for which ones.

Originally posted by IthrowwithClocks
I think God knows ALL emotions we also have. We are created by his image remember ???

Fear?

Originally posted by FreakyKBH
[b]Love is an abstraction.
Would energy fall into that category?

A general problem with claiming that God does X*--where X* is not the same as, but only analogous to, the human X, and is ultimately incomprehensible to humans due to its *ness--is that it is impossible to characterize what "analogous" means.
Not at all. When the Bible tells ...[text shortened]... en state in order for them to be used as a point of reference to help us know God's thoughts.[/b]

Okay, I concede it is coherent to say that some abstract things, like energy, can do something. But energy is not personal; it does not perform acts. If God is abstract like energy, and not a person, he cannot perform acts. Not can he brings any thoughts or feelings to bear on us. This is not how the bible describes him. He is like a person, but bigger and more powerful.

In the case of most or all analogies, like the appetitive one you gave, we can see both the content of the analogy and the object to which it refers, and can therefore adjudicate its aptness. However, in the case of God, we only have the content of the analogy, so it is not possible to adjudicate its aptness.