Should we

@kellyjay said
I'm not at all suggesting replace feelings with commitment, and I challenge you to find one sentence where I have said that!

I accept that challenge: 🙂

'Strip feelings away they come and go, but commitment, acts of will even when someone is angry and still does what is right by their family...'

@kellyjay said
The commitment towards strangers is being there for them, period. The importance of another human life is that it merely human life, a divine creature. Now if you think it is nothing but evolved pond scum you may have another view about human life and then have a scale of importance that is quite different than mine, one a little more selective on who is essential and who isn't.

We both have said 'family come first.' Your argument Kelly is self-defeating.

@ghost-of-a-duke said
We both have said 'family come first.' Your argument Kelly is self-defeating.

I don't think so. I don't care what job you have; there are priorities and commitments. We are committed to everyone, and in addition, we have priority with those who we have been entrusted with, the priorities don't alter commitments. Family first people always!

@ghost-of-a-duke said
I accept that challenge: 🙂

'Strip feelings away they come and go, but commitment, acts of will even when someone is angry and still does what is right by their family...'

That was not the point of that statement, it was that we cannot let passions dictate to us the direction of our lives, since they can change into other things and quite quickly.

There was nothing in that suggesting our feeling or emotions are not part of our love for one another. My point to you remains that love without a commitment can be nothing but a shallow selfish feeling, and I would have a hard time justifying calling that love.

Men leave wives and children who they ”loved” for someone new. If you are calling that love, we disagree!

@kellyjay said
That was not the point of that statement, it was that we cannot let passions dictate to us the direction of our lives, since they can change into other things and quite quickly.

There was nothing in that suggesting our feeling or emotions are not part of our love for one another. My point to you remains that love without a commitment can be nothing but a shallow selfish f ...[text shortened]... eave wives and children who they ”loved” for someone new. If you are calling that love, we disagree!

I have not tried to separate love and commitment. Again, only you have done that as a means of generalizing love and stripping it of meaningful emotion.

And yes, love can die. Welcome to the real world.

@ghost-of-a-duke said
I have not tried to separate love and commitment. Again, only you have done that as a means of generalizing love and stripping it of meaningful emotion.

And yes, love can die. Welcome to the real world.

Real-world, you can keep your version of real love, it's not worth anything, because it lasts until something better comes along!

@kellyjay said
Real-world, you can keep your version of real love, it's not worth anything, because it lasts until something better comes along!

Love can endure, and love can wilt and die. I'm sure we have experienced both in our time.

@ghost-of-a-duke said
Love can endure, and love can wilt and die. I'm sure we have experienced both in our time.

I have experienced many things, one of the things I have grown to understand is, when someone says I love you those that mean it and those who want what they want, can be using the same words, but don't mean the same thing.

@kellyjay said
Greek translations of love would work better than the English language usage as well. Since love in English is not very precise, the same word carries so many different meanings none being unimportant.

I'm not sure about that statement. I did a search on biblehub [1] and looking at the results there are basically two words: agape (goodwill) and phil- (prefix). Brotherly love is given as philadelphia, and philosophy is the love of sophistry [2]. Philanthropia is the love of mankind from which we get the English word philanthropy.

Philoteknos is the love of a parent for their children, it gives philandros is the love of a wife for her husband - the converse isn't given. Philoneikia is given as the love of strife, so a rhyming slang idea comes along (trouble & strife = wife).

What I'm getting at is that the way Biblical Greek works the various meanings for love are specified by whatever the love is for. Really it's not that different from English where there's just the one word "love" and we get what the exact emotion is from the context.

[1] http://biblehub.net/searchgreek.php?q=love
[2] sophos = wisdom, but as a physicist I couldn't quite resist 😉

@deepthought said
I'm not sure about that statement. I did a search on biblehub [1] and looking at the results there are basically two words: agape (goodwill) and phil- (prefix). Brotherly love is given as philadelphia, and philosophy is the love of sophistry [2]. Philanthropia is the love of mankind from which we get the English word philanthropy.

Philoteknos is the love of a pare ...[text shortened]... lehub.net/searchgreek.php?q=love
[2] sophos = wisdom, but as a physicist I couldn't quite resist 😉

agape, phileo, eros and storge

Definitions of Greeks Words for Love
Agapeo: Unconditional love; the love of God in the renewed mind in manifestation
Phileo: Love between friends
Eros: The sense of being in love; romantic love
Storge: Love of family; Parent/child, siblings, cousins, etc. In a very close family, agape is felt as well.

I pulled this off the web:
http://gods-word-first.org/fruitofspirit/biblelove-agape-phileo-eros-storge.html

@deepthought said
I'm not sure about that statement. I did a search on biblehub [1] and looking at the results there are basically two words: agape (goodwill) and phil- (prefix). Brotherly love is given as philadelphia, and philosophy is the love of sophistry [2]. Philanthropia is the love of mankind from which we get the English word philanthropy.

Philoteknos is the love of a pare ...[text shortened]... lehub.net/searchgreek.php?q=love
[2] sophos = wisdom, but as a physicist I couldn't quite resist 😉

My point towards Duke was and is that love is more than a feeling. Sorry, I keep thinking about this song when I wrote that. Boston: More than a feeling YouTube, the song is meaningless in content towards the discussion, but it keeps going through my head. 😊

The thing about God and reality, He cannot do anything in contradiction to His nature of goodness, truth, holiness, love, and so on; therefore He cannot tell a lie and will not create inconsistencies by contradicting Himself in His creation, He is truth. His truth is secure from violation; we will break ourselves on it before we can break it, so when He talks about love, that is a lasting thing, not something vague without conviction or meaning.

When we are speaking about love, it has be the real thing, not something inconsistent that has more to do with us than the other. If it is all about us, it could be lustful cravings, status, a conquest, where we like how we feel at the time, it then all boils down to what we are getting out of it, therefore if this person we “loved” stops doing it for us, on to the next one.

Real love in marriage, for example, is connecting to the other person, they are not mere objects, they complete us, we become one. It is one of the critical driving force in all of the Bible, love God with all of our hearts, and love each other as ourselves. If we turn love into an on-again, off-again emotion, the whole of those commandments become meaningless.

The most exceptional example of love is God sending us Jesus Christ while we were yet sinners, there was nothing about us that made us worthy as sinners, nothing about us that God needed, nothing about us that we could do to alter our position in front of a Holy God. For God so loved the world He did something for us, love is doing for the other, an act of will. So seeing others around us in need when we can do something about it, we should do what we can.

@kellyjay said
agape, phileo, eros and storge

Definitions of Greeks Words for Love
Agapeo: Unconditional love; the love of God in the renewed mind in manifestation
Phileo: Love between friends
Eros: The sense of being in love; romantic love
Storge: Love of family; Parent/child, siblings, cousins, etc. In a very close family, agape is felt as well.

I pulled this off the web:
http://gods-word-first.org/fruitofspirit/biblelove-agape-phileo-eros-storge.html

I tried searching for all these on Biblehub, there were no results for eros, possibly unsurprisingly as erotic content generally comes under the word "knew" - as in "to know in the Biblical sense.". Biblehub gives this distinction:

5384 phílos – a friend; someone dearly loved (prized) in a personal, intimate way; a trusted confidant, held dear in a close bond of personal affection.

Note: The root (phil-) conveys experiential, personal affection – indicating 5384 (phílos) expresses experience-based love.

[25 (agapáō) focuses on value-driven (an decision-based) love – which of course does not exclude affection!]

https://biblehub.com/greek/5384.htm

and the page on agape has the following:

26 agápē – properly, love which centers in moral preference. So too in secular ancient Greek, 26 (agápē) focuses on preference; likewise the verb form (25 /agapáō) in antiquity meant "to prefer" (TDNT, 7). In the NT, 26 (agápē) typically refers to divine love (= what God prefers).

https://biblehub.com/str/greek/26.htm

When I searched for storge it actually gives the word philostorge:

5387 philóstorgos (from 5384 /phílos, "lover, friend" and storgē, "natural or family love" ) – properly, a lover of family (used only in Ro 12:10).

5387 /philóstorgos ("devoted love, shown by family-members" ) is that special affection shared between members of God's family – people born-again (divinely adopted) and serving the same (heavenly) Father!

https://biblehub.com/str/greek/5387.htm

So it pretty much agrees with what you're saying, but with the caveat that agape is more of a cognitive thing, whereas philos and storge have more of an affective meaning (in the psychology sense).

@deepthought said
I tried searching for all these on Biblehub, there were no results for eros, possibly unsurprisingly as erotic content generally comes under the word "knew" - as in "to know in the Biblical sense.". Biblehub gives this distinction:[quote]5384 phílos – a friend; someone dearly loved (prized) in a personal, intimate way; a trusted confidant, held dear in a close bon ...[text shortened]... whereas philos and storge have more of an affective meaning (in the psychology sense).

"...agape is more of a cognitive thing ..."

I agree we will it by doing it, we see the need and we address it. We make a commitment or vow we keep it, and don't break it.

@kellyjay said
My point towards Duke was and is that love is more than a feeling. Sorry, I keep thinking about this song when I wrote that. Boston: More than a feeling [youtube]oR4uKcvQbGQ[/youtube], the song is meaningless in content towards the discussion, but it keeps going through my head. 😊

The thing about God and reality, He cannot do anything in contradiction to His nature of goo ...[text shortened]... ill. So seeing others around us in need when we can do something about it, we should do what we can.

I need to do a little research on the concept of "Love God with all your Heart." in order to comment on that, it's an interesting question as to exactly what is meant by that. The conversation's opened up new understanding for me.

The thing about God and reality, He cannot do anything in contradiction to His nature...

I'm not certain this is right. Bear in mind this is an agnostic viewpoint, but nevertheless, there is a difference between cannot and will not, if God is omnipotent and has agency then He has a choice. He surely can act in contradiction to His nature but chooses not to. By which argument faith is a matter of trusting God to act consistently with what we believe God is.

I keep thinking of the Beatles song, Love is All You Need. Doobedoobedoo. 😍

@deepthought said
I need to do a little research on the concept of "Love God with all your Heart." in order to comment on that, it's an interesting question as to exactly what is meant by that. The conversation's opened up new understanding for me.

The thing about God and reality, He cannot do anything in contradiction to His nature...

I'm not certain this is right. Bear ...[text shortened]... t we believe God is.

I keep thinking of the Beatles song, Love is All You Need. Doobedoobedoo. 😍

I believe contradictions about God and His nature have more to do with our understanding of God and His nature, than God actually being in conflict with Himself. God cannot lie, He will not, since He is perfection, anything done less than would be against His nature.

Hey, I gave a link for the song I talked about, and you didn't, why, what's up with that? 🙂