Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!cs.utexas.edu!swrinde!mips!dimacs.rutgers.edu!aramis.rutgers.edu!athos.rutgers.edu!christian From: mark@drd.com (Mark Lawrence) Newsgroups: soc.religion.christian Subject: Nature of God (was Re: Could Jesus have sinned?) Message-ID: Date: 12 Jun 91 02:38:18 GMT Sender: hedrick@athos.rutgers.edu Organization: DRD Corporation Lines: 31 Approved: christian@aramis.rutgers.edu >In article kk00+@andrew.cmu.edu (Kathleen P. Kowalski) writes: >>He didn't want us to love him >>because there was no other choice, but because we wanted to. I >>personally don't think that love that is forced is worth much. > In article lindborg@cs.washington.edu (Jeff Lindborg) writes: >so instead of not giving us a choice to love him, he gives us the >ever-popular "love me or else" concept. Oh so much better to be >sure. Is love derived of fear of punishment any better than love >that is forced? > >You are still left with a petty, spiteful, God who seems more bent >on revenge and hatred than anything else... Only, perhaps, if one is bent on perceiving Him that way. I've known children who, as a result of mistreatment or bad parenting, seem to be incapable of viewing any action taken in their behalf by someone else without suspicion and distrust. A guardian of such a child could take any number of actions for the child's benefit. The child could perceive such actions as petty, spiteful, done for revenge and perhaps as an expression of hatred. On the other hand, a child secure in the love of a parent or lovers secure in their love for one another have no reason to distrust the motivations of the actions taken in their behalf. One's picture of God depends, in an essential way, on one's relationship with Him. -- mark@drd.com mark@jnoc.go.jp $B!J%^!<%/!&%i%l%s%9!K(B Nihil novum sub solem