In 1929 Cole Porter wrote the cute little tune, What Is This Thing Called Love?. Actually, a better question than you might imagine. The claim of many Christians is that God is "all-loving" just as He is omnipresent and omnipotent and omniscient. It is, in fact, one of the premises in the most popular argument against the existence of God. "If there is evil in the world, either God is not all-loving or not all-powerful." I would argue, however, that God is not all-loving. Let's take a look. We know that Scripture (my unbreakable standard) says that "God so loved the world, that He gave His only begotten Son, that whoever believes in Him shall not perish, but have eternal life" (John 3:16). "There," those who are prone to disagree with me out of the gate, "that says you are wrong. God loves the world so much." That's not actually what that text says. That "so" is not a quantity -- "so much" -- but a quality, as in "just so." It is "in this way." "God loved the world in this way." What way? He gave His Son for whoever believes. There are limits. But that's not really my point here.
Cole Porter asked the right question: "What is this thing called love?" When we say, "God is all-loving," to what "loving" are we referring? In today's venacular, we speak easily of "making love." That love? When we think of love, we think of romance, of "I can't live without you" love. That love? When we imagine love, we think of heart-thumping, pulse-racing passion. That love? Paul, on the other hand, talks about love (1 Cor 13:4-8) that is patient (not emotional) and kind (not emotional). He includes "not arrogant," "does not insist on its own way," and "not resentful." He says that "Love bears all things, believes all things, hopes all things, endures all things." None of these are predicated on either a romantic or sexual concept of love ... for us or for God.
When we hear "God loves you" we think of a God who is enraptured with us. He feels oh so warmly toward us. Like the father of a cute little demon child, this parent can't be upset with the little dickens ... because He loves us. That's not God's love. That's not even good love. Be careful when you read, "God is love" (1 John 4:8) and envision a warm-hearted, soft-and-cuddly God who is so enamored with you that you can do no wrong. God is love, but that's not love and He's not that love at all.
5 comments:
I've been thinking about John 3:16 recently, and I think the only reason the quantity definition is problematic because we've lost sight of what love means to God. I mean, He really did love the world so much that He sent His Son, but that speaks to both His great love and our great depravity. But with the rest of the passage in context, that love doesn't lead to some universalism, but salvation is still only given to those that believe in Christ. I agree that the translation of "God so loved the world..." is a problematic and inaccurate translation, but I don't think it is as egregious, if the rest of your theology lines up with Scripture as well.
I don't think it's egregious (good word) either, but in today's world with "love" meaning "warm affection" and the like, it can be. It's the genuine, biblical notion of "love" in view and modern readers often miss that.
I think that part of the problem is when people talk about how YHWH is love. When someone fashions a god in their own image, then they impose their views of what love looks like on their image of their god. As long as people hold to the warm affection concept of love, it seems to put the focus back on themselves because it means that they are so lovable that YHWH is compelled to love them.
And when you find yourself thinking God is compelled to love you, you are no longer thinking about grace.
David,
Bingo.
Post a Comment