Do you love God?

a reply to: Joneselius

As the Bible says:

“Let your love be without hypocrisy. Abhor what is wicked; cling to what is good.” (Romans 12:9)

“O you who love Jehovah, hate what is bad.” (Ps 97:10)

“The fear of Jehovah means the hating of bad.

I hate self-exaltation and pride and the evil way and perverse speech.” (Pr 8:13)

In her autobiographical film Out on a Limb, famous actress and New Age author Shirley MacLaine stands on a windswept beach with her arms outstretched and exclaims: “I am God! I am God!” Like her, many New Agers promote the search for a higher self and the idea of a god within. (self-exaltation playing on people's pride) They teach that humans need only raise their consciousness to find their divinity.

Once this is accomplished, they claim, the reality of a universal interconnectedness becomes clear​—everything is god, and god is everything. (perverse speech cause it's not true, i.e. false, just like the idea of a god within, it also misleads people about, or distracts them from looking into the biblical notion of a personal God; New Age philosophy has no personal god to be worshiped, yet it often promotes the idea of a god that can be found everywhere and anywhere.)

“I will not set anything worthless* [Or “good-for-nothing.”] before my eyes.

I hate the deeds of those who deviate from what is right;

I will have nothing to do with them.* [Or “Their deeds do not cling to me.”]

...

No deceitful person will dwell in my house,

And no liar will stand in my presence.*” [Lit., “in front of my eyes.”]

Every morning I will silence* [Or “do away with.”] all the wicked of the earth,”] (Ps 101:3,7,8a)

Sounds like he got the message (King David). It wouldn't be very loving anyway if you see people being deceived with falsehoods, and basically ignore it. Then your love for them is not without hypocrisy. At the very least you'll want to give them a heads-up that they're going in the wrong direction (if your love for them is true/real/genuine and without hypocrisy). As Jesus did at Matthew 7:13,14 for example:

“Go in through the narrow gate, because broad is the gate and spacious is the road leading off into destruction, and many are going in through it; whereas narrow is the gate and cramped the road leading off into life, and few are finding it.”

“All those for whom I have affection, I reprove and discipline”, said Jesus at Rev 3:19. Just like his Father's and his God's reproof is an expression of love, not to be abhorred or rejected. (Pr 3:11, 12)

“My son, do not reject the discipline of Jehovah,

And do not loathe his reproof,

For those whom Jehovah loves he reproves,

Just as a father does a son in whom he delights.” (Pr 3:11, 12)

Since the Scriptures are inspired of God, all reproof solidly based on them is really reproof from him. (2Ti 3:16) Although reproof can benefit those who receive it, the efforts of the reprover are not always appreciated. Thus Proverbs 9:7, 8 warns: “He that is correcting the ridiculer is taking to himself dishonor, and he that is giving a reproof to someone wicked​—a defect in him. Do not reprove a ridiculer, that he may not hate you. Give a reproof to a wise person and he will love you.”

The sinful human tendency is to resent reproof and the human servant through whom it may be given. But yielding to this tendency degrades one to the level of an unreasoning beast lacking moral discrimination; as the inspired proverb expresses it: “A hater of reproof is unreasoning.” (Pr 12:1) In contrast, the psalmist David, who was himself repeatedly reproved, wrote: “Should the righteous one strike me, it would be a loving-kindness; and should he reprove me, it would be oil upon the head, which my head would not want to refuse.”​—Ps 141:5.

And 2 Timothy 4:2-4 encourages Christians to:

“Preach the word; be at it urgently in favorable times and difficult times; reprove, reprimand, exhort, with all patience and art of teaching. For there will be a period of time when they will not put up with the wholesome* [Or “healthful; beneficial.”] teaching, but according to their own desires, they will surround themselves with teachers to have their ears tickled.* [Or “to tell them what they want to hear.”] They will turn away from listening to the truth and give attention to false stories.”

One of the most telling features of ATS and the internet in general as a window into this world's philosophies and views that are “falsely called ‘knowledge.’” (1Ti 6:20). I quote it a lot, but usually only verses 3 and 4.

a reply to: whereislogic

I really wish you would stop copying and pasting from the watchtower......

You post as if it is written by you....isn't that criminal?

Your posts are sooooo long....... because you don't write them.

a reply to: Itisnowagain
I sometimes do it because I don't want to skip too much from a particular article, and I've had comments deleted for breaking the rule that you are only allowed to post 3 paragraphs from an external article, a rule I really can't live up to when the subject is complicated and I want to share a bit more information or background about it (including introductory paragraphs). Or when I'm combining articles and adding my own commentary in between, or when I want to quote something from an article that itself contains a quotation, like in my previous comment the paragraph about Shirley MacLaine (where I also added my own commentary in between).

I've also noticed that people on ATS tend to ignore anything in external boxes (the "ex", "/ex" boxes), and then they present arguments, challenges or questions that have already been addressed in the article they are ignoring. Focusing only on what I'm saying when that is less important than what I wanted to share from the article. I'm also not so eloquent, so when I read something that I consider 'well put', I don't really want to change it (too much). Also, when I agree with something word for word, I choose to use the exact same words, and they might as well be my words; why would I go through the difficulty of putting it in my own words, lose the 'well put'-factor in the process, and then not liking the endresult and saying it differently than the way I wanted to say it, which was word for word the same as in the article, cause that was the way I liked it in the first place and the whole reason I wanted to share it?

Often when I know I can stick to 3 paragraphs about something, I do tend to use the external boxes and give the source article. Or when I don't plan to add my own commentary in between or not make too many changes in the order of the things being said or leave out too much so you get so many gaps and "..." (which I have to use when I'm using external boxes to indicate I skipped something from the article).

The shorter comments on ATS hardly ever have anything of value to contribute to the discussions. Like yours just now (you could have picked a much better comment for your complaint anyway, one where I actually broke the 3 paragraph rule; which I do try to live up to, but it doesn't always pan out that way. Sometimes the paragraphs are also very short, and I try if I can get away with 4 or 5, but then I always run the risk of making a comment for nothing when the moderator edits my comment and removes the most crucial paragraphs and keeps only the first introductory 3*). *: My behaviour has changed in this regards of having too many of my comments gimped or nullified that way, wasting a lot of time on a comment that loses all its most crucial points.

a reply to: whereislogic

I hope you are not trusting in "clinging to what is good" to get you into heaven.

a reply to: Itisnowagain

He just might be an editor of the Watch Tower as far as we know.

a reply to: ChesterJohn
Well I highly doubt it .....because he would have loved to have said it in his reply to me, if he was.

I guess in Bhakti-Yoga it's a process, that could even take many lifetimes.
But, praise Lord Krishna, my natural super-soul somewhere responded to God, and I'm on a path with Him.
I won't say I'm temple material yet, and it's good to be honest.
In the Kali-Yuga there are also many who claim to "love" God, but have no connection at all.
Even some of those who take birth as humans cannot connect with God, despite having the physical and mental capacities to worship and learn the philosophies.
We're all devotees of something, I guess we all have to work out in our own way whether that's something material or eternal (or maybe both, something material, like a car or computer you could devote to eternal use sometimes).

When God takes you, where you thought you'd never find Him.

On the battle-field of Kurukshetra, for example.

Oh dear Arjuna, do not be disturbed ...

Sharing a chariot with Krishna.

I sometimes wonder whether the sort of brotherly messages between Krishna and Arjuna mirror those of Christ and Saint John?

a reply to: halfoldman

Maybe along the lines of Gilgamesh and Enkidu.

I'm not too familiar with Mahabharata actually. Just did a search for Krishna and Arjuna and read an article.

The references to Christ and Saint John are really rather sparse.

a reply to: pthena

Well Hare Krishna is a sparse philosophy where I live.
So "duh".

What is Bhakti Yoga?
yogainternational.com...

According to the Narada Bhakti Sutras, bhakti is intense love for God.

Well, you got to hear it too.

Hare Krishna Kirtan, London (2013).

Berlin - male devotional.

Hare Krishna:

A haunted house gender reversal.

Being a man, I went into the stables, and I could feel this unearthly presence immediately.

So I told my wife, and she said you're just being silly.

Why men can dance, and ladies may get upset?

By nature men have a stable hormonal system, women do not.

So, do hear them too - the trauma units?

Now that wine's legal and all.

I spend quite amount of time on theology, and I gotta say, Norm Macdonald is on the right track. Paraphrasing here: If there's a God, and he created the universe, then an all-good being can't create good, because it'd only be expansion. So all he can create is bad. So he creates bad in a godlike way that has the freedom to do good.

Its the choice of faith. Do I believe in god? No. Its too undefined. My definition of god is certainly different than anyone else's. That's natural. Do I have faith? Absolutely.

I've lived trusting my faith in the workings of the universe. We could all be skin cells in a giant creature.

Eastern religions would tell you that the thread of conciousness is rare, and to cherish it. I agree, at least today. Many religions tell you that without wrong, there is no right. Yin and yang stuff. Kinda reminds me of the song Heaven by Talking Heads.

So what is it? What is God? How many are there?

What do you believe nirvana to be? True bliss?

So I suppose, the way I see it now, we're an undulating mess.. But we're together.

Keep together.

a reply to: sine.nomine

You seem not to be looking for the God of the Bible that much is clear.

The Bible hey, does it not say King David was dancing in his underpants?