If God is Love...
Posted by Chris McKinny | Posted in | Posted on 7:00 AM
0
John's Definition of Love:
If we follow John's logic we are stuck by his statement that "God is love." The natural implication is that the true definition of love is incomprehensible without a knowledge of its source, namely God. Even the basest human can understand love in some form, but without knowing God that knowledge is at best an understanding of the result of God's actions and not his ultimate means. In other words, we can understand the effect of love through the common grace of creation, but we cannot grasp its true meaning because we don't know where it came from, who it was ultimately meant for, or how we benefit from its existence.
A true understanding of the means and result of God's love - causes a thinker not to ask the question of "How could a loving God send people to Hell?" Rather this understanding causes one to flip the question on its head and ask with shame like the tax collector of Luke 18:10-14, and pose the following query: "How could a God who is Love, send the fullest expression of His Love, His divine Word, His only Begotten, His very Wisdom to His blaspheming, hateful, Eden-ruining, self-worshiping creatures?" This is the ultimate question for humankind. This is the question that we must ask before we can ever hope to understand the true meaning of love.
So is love ultimately axiomatic? Yes, but only for one who is "born of God and knows God."
“Beloved, let us love one another, for love is from God, and whoever loves has been born of God and knows God. Anyone who does not love does not know God, because God is love. In this the love of God was made manifest among us, that God sent his only Son into the world, so that we might live through him.” (1 John 4:7–9 ESV)Is love axiomatic? The natural response is "of course" - but when we consider the biblical definition of love (look above) - how then can so many state various renditions of the following "How could a loving God send people to hell, let bad things happen to good people, etc.?"
If we follow John's logic we are stuck by his statement that "God is love." The natural implication is that the true definition of love is incomprehensible without a knowledge of its source, namely God. Even the basest human can understand love in some form, but without knowing God that knowledge is at best an understanding of the result of God's actions and not his ultimate means. In other words, we can understand the effect of love through the common grace of creation, but we cannot grasp its true meaning because we don't know where it came from, who it was ultimately meant for, or how we benefit from its existence.
A true understanding of the means and result of God's love - causes a thinker not to ask the question of "How could a loving God send people to Hell?" Rather this understanding causes one to flip the question on its head and ask with shame like the tax collector of Luke 18:10-14, and pose the following query: "How could a God who is Love, send the fullest expression of His Love, His divine Word, His only Begotten, His very Wisdom to His blaspheming, hateful, Eden-ruining, self-worshiping creatures?" This is the ultimate question for humankind. This is the question that we must ask before we can ever hope to understand the true meaning of love.
So is love ultimately axiomatic? Yes, but only for one who is "born of God and knows God."
Posts
Comments (0)
Post a Comment