Love vs Tyranny

page: 2
7
<< 1    3  4  5 >>

log in

join

posted on Mar, 1 2013 @ 03:33 PM
link   

Originally posted by AfterInfinity

1love
noun ˈləv
Definition of LOVE

a (1) : strong affection for another arising out of kinship or personal ties (2) : attraction based on sexual desire : affection and tenderness felt by lovers (3) : affection based on admiration, benevolence, or common interests
b : an assurance of affection
2
: warm attachment, enthusiasm, or devotion
3
a : the object of attachment, devotion, or admiration



tyr·an·ny
noun ˈtir-ə-nē
plural tyr·an·nies
Definition of TYRANNY
1
: oppressive power ; especially : oppressive power exerted by government
2
a : a government in which absolute power is vested in a single ruler; especially : one characteristic of an ancient Greek city-state


So according to these definitions, we have an emotion of attachment, devotion, and/or admiration vs an oppressive power or a government in which absolute power belongs to a single individual.

So tell me, ATS: can love and tyranny be mutually inclusive? If not, where do you draw the line?

By your definitions there, there are millions of examples of people who have been "devoted" (love) to oppressive governments, so that's kind of a pointless question.

edit on 1-3-2013 by adjensen because: (no reason given)




posted on Mar, 1 2013 @ 03:41 PM
link   
reply to post by adjensen
 




By your definitions there, there are millions of examples of people who have been "devoted" (love) to oppressive governments, so that's kind of a pointless question.


Not at all. We're humans - this question is in regards to a divine being. There's a whole different set of standards in play here.

Thanks for visiting.



posted on Mar, 1 2013 @ 03:44 PM
link   
reply to post by NOTurTypical
 





The reason why I bring it up is because many people don't think God is a tyrant but is a loving, sovereign, and holy God/Father. So to those people the premise cannot be addressed as written.


So, you don't believe in the God of the Old Testament then. Because clearly, he was a tyrant.



posted on Mar, 1 2013 @ 03:47 PM
link   

Originally posted by AfterInfinity
reply to post by adjensen
 




By your definitions there, there are millions of examples of people who have been "devoted" (love) to oppressive governments, so that's kind of a pointless question.


Not at all. We're humans - this question is in regards to a divine being. There's a whole different set of standards in play here.

Then your definitions are not appropriate -- I've never seen any indication that God is a tyrant, and comparing him to a "repressive government" doesn't make any sense, as government is a product of human beings, not of God.

Maybe you need to re-phrase your question?



posted on Mar, 1 2013 @ 03:57 PM
link   
reply to post by adjensen
 




By your definitions there, there are millions of examples of people who have been "devoted" (love) to oppressive governments, so that's kind of a pointless question.


Not at all. We're humans - this question is in regards to a god. There's a whole different set of standards in play here.

Thanks for visiting.



posted on Mar, 1 2013 @ 04:14 PM
link   

Originally posted by AfterInfinity
reply to post by adjensen
 




By your definitions there, there are millions of examples of people who have been "devoted" (love) to oppressive governments, so that's kind of a pointless question.


Not at all. We're humans - this question is in regards to a god. There's a whole different set of standards in play here.

Then why are the definitions (and, by extension, standards,) those relating to human beings?


If you're honestly asking a question, not attempting to further a cause, you need to explain how God and a repressive government are the same thing, or else restate your question in a non-subjective form.



posted on Mar, 1 2013 @ 04:18 PM
link   
reply to post by adjensen
 


Wasn't the "Law" of the Old Testament a governmental law!? Nearly the entire Old Testament portrays God as a tyrant! The "God of Love" is nowhere to be found in the Old Testament.



posted on Mar, 1 2013 @ 04:26 PM
link   

Originally posted by windword
reply to post by adjensen
 


Wasn't the "Law" of the Old Testament a governmental law!?

Of course not. What "government" did the Israelites have in the desert when Moses came down the mountain? Judaic Law is inherently religious and cultural in nature, not secular.



posted on Mar, 1 2013 @ 04:34 PM
link   
reply to post by adjensen
 


The Hebrews didn't have separation of Church and State. The Judaic Law was the law of the land. It was handed down by "God" and had to be followed, or be killed.

God's tyranny extended past the rule of mere Hebrews though:


10 When you march up to attack a city, make its people an offer of peace. 11 If they accept and open their gates, all the people in it shall be subject to forced labor and shall work for you. 12 If they refuse to make peace and they engage you in battle, lay siege to that city.



posted on Mar, 1 2013 @ 04:48 PM
link   
reply to post by AfterInfinity
 



I'm assuming you have an opinion as well, which is why I'm asking you to explain to me why you hold that opinion. I posed a question, and I would appreciate an answer.


And I gave my opinion. I don't believe God is a tyrant. I believe He is sovereign, Holy, and righteous.



posted on Mar, 1 2013 @ 04:53 PM
link   

Originally posted by windword
reply to post by NOTurTypical
 





The reason why I bring it up is because many people don't think God is a tyrant but is a loving, sovereign, and holy God/Father. So to those people the premise cannot be addressed as written.


So, you don't believe in the God of the Old Testament then. Because clearly, he was a tyrant.


Straw man. I never stated I don't believe in the God of the OT. And I reject that He is tyrannical, so that's certainly not "clear", that's merely your prejudicial arbitrary conjecture.

My belief is that e is the Holy and Sovereign Creator of the universe. Which entitles Him to act as such.



posted on Mar, 1 2013 @ 04:59 PM
link   

Originally posted by windword
reply to post by adjensen
 


The Hebrews didn't have separation of Church and State. The Judaic Law was the law of the land. It was handed down by "God" and had to be followed, or be killed.

Who killed King David when he ruled Israel and committed adultery? Who killed King Solomon when he was worshiping those idols? The whole Old Testament is stuffed full of examples of people who flagrantly ignored the Law, it's the predominant theme of the whole text, for pete's sakes.

You have a very convenient read of the Bible, I'll give you that



posted on Mar, 1 2013 @ 05:01 PM
link   
It is not possible to be a tyrant and be loving.

If you meet a tyrannical god, run as far away as you can - otherwise you are AGREEING to be a SLAVE to such gods.

There are many disgusting parasitic gods feeding off of the worship of humans - their energy.

With love there are no threats for an endless, forevermore, eternal, "punishment".



posted on Mar, 1 2013 @ 05:01 PM
link   
reply to post by NOTurTypical
 


Whether or not this Old Testament, jealous and wrathful god has the right to inflict pain, suffering and death isn't really the question. Does this behavior exhibit an example of LOVE that we, as human's can emulate?

The answer is : "No."

When humans act that way they're judged mentally ill or sadistically criminal. There is no lesson of love in the requirement of death for breaking on of Yahweh's laws or for a neighboring city to worship a god of a different name.

A god that has to command people to love "him" is not a "god of love." That's tyranny.


edit on 1-3-2013 by windword because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 1 2013 @ 05:05 PM
link   
reply to post by windword
 


He never commanded me to love Him.

I do because of who He is and what He has done in Christ.

But you're entitled to your opinion, as am I.



posted on Mar, 1 2013 @ 05:07 PM
link   

Originally posted by adjensen

Originally posted by windword
reply to post by adjensen
 


The Hebrews didn't have separation of Church and State. The Judaic Law was the law of the land. It was handed down by "God" and had to be followed, or be killed.

Who killed King David when he ruled Israel and committed adultery? Who killed King Solomon when he was worshiping those idols? The whole Old Testament is stuffed full of examples of people who flagrantly ignored the Law, it's the predominant theme of the whole text, for pete's sakes.

You have a very convenient read of the Bible, I'll give you that


And likewise, why didn't He kill Adam and Eve when the violated just one simple command?



posted on Mar, 1 2013 @ 05:08 PM
link   
reply to post by adjensen
 


Who had the courage to gather a crowd to stone their King, who God put in place? It's up to God to punish the ones when God can't make others pick up stones.

Actually, the fact that the kings and rich guys got off easy, kinda tells me that the whole Old Testament god guy was a made up god guy anyway.

Do you really believe in a creator god appearing in a burning bush and flying around in a pillar of fire, striking people and cities down?

But if he did exist, he was a tyrant!



edit on 1-3-2013 by windword because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 1 2013 @ 05:09 PM
link   
reply to post by NOTurTypical
 


Imagine if an army came and attacked your home town requiring that you either become a slave or die, now imagine if that army claimed to be acting out the will of god, would you believe it was right for them to do it? What if everyone in your family was killed except you, what would you think of said army?

It's easy for you to say he wasn't a tyrant because you weren't around when he did what he did, plus you have been tricked into believing the Hebrew army was god. It wasn't gods will, it was the will of the Hebrews that killed those people.

Power hungry people usually lie to justify what they do, in this case the Hebrews justified it by calling it god's will. It's not really that hard of a concept to grasp.

God's will back then is equivalent to the WMD's that were supposed to be in Iraq. It was an easy scapegoat for those in power to do what they wanted without any consequences.
edit on 1-3-2013 by 3NL1GHT3N3D1 because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 1 2013 @ 05:13 PM
link   
reply to post by NOTurTypical
 


You are most certainly commanded to "love God". Do I need to quote the scriptures to you?



posted on Mar, 1 2013 @ 05:14 PM
link   

Originally posted by windword
Actually, the fact that the kings and rich guys got off easy, kinda tells me that the whole Old Testament god guy was a made up god guy anyway.

Again, you really, really do not understand the Hebrew Bible.


Do you really believe in a creator god appearing in a burning bush and flying around in a pillar of fire, striking people and cities down?

What I believe or do not isn't germane to this discussion.


But if he did exist, he was a tyrant!

Hardly. A tyrant would never exercise mercy, and there are clear examples of God's mercy in the Bible.

With a superficial view of the Hebrew Bible, it is easy to draw all sorts of invalid conclusions about the nature of God. If you are truly interested in learning about the faith espoused in that text, I would suggest that, rather than making silly posts here, you find a Rabbi and ask him to address your concerns.





new topics
top topics
 
7
<< 1    3  4  5 >>

log in

join