How Should One Best Understand Divine Love Essay Example

LORD" (Bible). This brief scripture is frequently used in circumstances we find perplexing. However, the verse proceeding it mentions God's offer of grace to the wicked if they seek Him.

In the given context, it is detailed by God that comprehending His compassionate mercy is a challenging task, and it does not explain why He would cast someone to hell. Assuming we can grasp the concept of God's love, where does this realization lead us? This introduces the second argument; Comprehending God's love is possible, but replicating it is not. We humans have the capacity to fathom and marvel at the enormity of God's love, yet we are incapable of practicing it in the same measure. This perspective suggests that when Jesus questioned Peter if he loved Him, Peter was echoing this sentiment. The limitation in our language confines us to a single word for 'love', be it expressing divinity, romance, or even a fondness for cheesy nachos.

In the Greek language, there existed several distinct words for love: phileo (indicative of brotherly love), eros (indicating romantic or sexual love), and agape (signifying limitlessness and often utilized to describe divine love), among other terms. This multitude of expressions results in a seeming redundancy in the English translation of John 21, where Jesus appears to repeatedly ask Peter "do you love me?" to which Peter consistently responds with "Lord, you know I love you" (Bible, John 21:15-17). However, exploring the original Greek uncovers that initially Jesus questions "Peter, do you agape me?", but Peter replies with "Lord, you are aware that I phileo you." Eventually, Jesus inquires if Peter phileos him, which Peter confirms.

This text appears to

validate the concept that human love cannot mirror God's love. Peter was acquainted with Jesus, yet he knew he couldn't replicate Jesus's love. So how can modern-day Christians hope to? This claim is contradictory to the biblical viewpoint that encourages emulation of Christ. So, is God deliberately setting Christians up to fall short, or can they genuinely emulate God's form of love (Winkleman 2)? The last possibility is that God's love is something achievable - a sentiment that Christians can comprehend and reflect in their day-to-day lives.

In "Thy Nature and Thy Name Is Love", Oord and Stone highlight Wesley's emphasis on the notion that the God, whom we are made in the image of, is fundamentally about love (71). What exactly does this entail when we say we are created in God's image? Are we literal replicas of God or just bear some resemblance to Him? Wynkoop advocates that an understanding of Hebrew language can dispel any assumptions one might have that being made in God's image implies an extreme likeness to Him. In her book, "The Theology of Love", she elucidates how the Hebrew term for 'image' actually means 'shadow'. Hence, while we may share certain qualities with God, we must understand that we are not exact equivalents of Him (Wynkoop 117).

The assertion that we can love as God does seems to be a mere abstract similarity rather than a factual reality, as our resemblance doesn't make it true. It becomes pointless to comprehend love if one is unable to reciprocate it. This is akin to finding a solution to global starvation and not taking any action towards it. What value does knowledge possess

if not applied? In an academic setting, the evaluation of understanding is carried out through its application. Educators gauge comprehension by assessing students' aptitude to put their learnings into practice.

Bernard Brady, in his work Christian Love, highlights how love is not passive but active. He presents one of the hardest challenges of love as loving one's adversaries. He illustrates Martin Luther King Jr.'s perspective on the crucial nature of enemy-love. Brady emphasises that love is more than allowing one's foes to trample over you, it demarcates an active stance (Brady 216-217). King declared that it is through our ability to endure, we shall wear down our enemies. We would make an appeal to your heart and conscience, eventually winning you over and our triumph would be two-fold (qtd. in Brady 217).

Dr. King's argument is that winning does not necessarily equate to being the victor. It's about achieving a higher purpose with love. For him, it would have been simpler to choose hatred, but he found love to be more fulfilling, providing a "double victory." This could be seen as an instance of God expressing His love through human beings. Dr. King not only comprehended love but also acted on it. Nevertheless, queries about divine love persist. If God truly loves everyone, how is it plausible that some people are destined for hell? If God's love extends to all, why doesn't He allow everyone into heaven? Furthermore, why does He permit the existence of genuine evil in the world? Genuine evil is not similar to Saint Augustine's long-held belief that all evil eventually contributes to the greater good (Oord and Stone 194). Even the biblical verse

often used to uphold this view has a disconcerting latter part. Romans 8:28 says: “And we know that in all things God works for the good of those who love him, who have been called according to his purpose” (Bible). The initial portion is a comforting maxim when things go awry - 'all things work together for good.' But what about the subsequent part: "For those who love him, who have been called according to his purpose."

Divine Love This section doesn't seem as comforting. Does it imply that God isn't impartial and favors certain individuals, making things align for their benefit because they align with His preferences? And if they are selected by Him, do they have any free will in the matter? Wesley proposed they did.He thought that the existence of evil in the world was due to our liberty, not the typical fault it on Adam and Eve's theory. Instead, he proposed that God had to permit evil to occur in order to grant his creation independence.

Given the depth of God's divine love, He could not simply eliminate the free will of His creations. Instead, He permits the existence of evil as a means of providing humans with autonomy. Individuals are therefore granted the capacity to make moral decisions, as well as to choose their belief stance towards Him. Ironically, it's humanity who wrongly criticizes God for evil and perceived limitations, whereas it is individuals who opt for sin and wrongdoing through their choices. As part of His divine love, God grants us this decision-making authority (Oord and Stone 198-199). So how should we embody love? Jesus addressed this in

Matthew 22 when a man asked Him to rank the commandments and denote the most important.

When the query, "Which is the highest commandment in the Law?" was posed, Jesus responded, "To love the Lord your God with all your heart, soul, and mind" (Bible, Matthew 22:36-37). His elucidation is vital for understanding the verse. Does it suggest that continuous absence of wholehearted love for God equates to sinning? To clarify, Jesus added, "Love your neighbor as you love yourself" as a way to demonstrate our affection for God (Bible, Matthew 22:39). Parents often believe that harmony between their children constitutes the most wonderful present they could receive.

Jesus essentially implies that if our aim is to please God, we must show love for our fellow human being. Oord and Stone shed more light on this by stating that, "The love envisioned by Wesley, although essentially directed towards God, incorporates and integrates self-love, the love of others, and the love of all living beings" (Oord and Stone 71). Highlighting what professor Oord shared in his lecture, loving God involves as much lateral perception as it does vertical. This understanding was grasped accurately by Mother Theresa who believed "'True love needs to originate from our neighbors. This love will then guide us to God'" (cited in Brady 221). To her, the essence of love lay less in mere contemplation but more so in practical action.

She was once described as simplistic and conventional by a critic, however, her profound expressions of love left a lasting impression on the citizens of Calcutta, one that they would eternally remember (Brady 218). In existence, there are those who possess academic intelligence, and

there are those who hold practical wisdom. Often the academically inclined receive the well-paid positions and influence, but it is truly the pragmatically wise who understand how to navigate real-world scenarios. Mother Theresa would be considered among the practically wise. There was no need for her to delve into an analysis of Greek definitions of love or pore over endless literature on the subject of love in order to grasp the true meaning of divine love.

It was evident daily in the lives she influenced and in the lives that influenced her. Oord and Stone suggest that “philosophy might indeed impart knowledge about God. However, for a theology committed to understanding the truth about God through Jesus Christ, special revelation stands as the principal source of truth about God” (Oord and Stone 264). Even with the presence of divine love in Mother Theresa’s life, “love has a psychological orientation” (Wynkoop 30). There's an aspect of Christ’s love that isn't visible in our day-to-day lives, which necessitates contemplation and discussion.

Consider the concept of God's prevenient grace: "But God demonstrates his own love for us in this: While we were still sinners, Christ died for us" (Bible, Romans 5:8). This signifies God's tremendous love for us, such that even when we were involved in transgressions He sacrificed His life for us. Prevenient grace portrays the scenario where God's mercy was bestowed upon us prior to our initiative towards Him. Another instance can be found in 1 John 4:10 "This is love: not that we loved God, but that he loved us and sent his Son as an atoning sacrifice for our sin" (Bible). For exhibiting this unconditional love

and not compelling our reciprocation, Christ is often referred to as a flawless gentleman.

The concept of divine love is referred to as agape (Wynkoop 98-99). The term agape is a Greek word which is commonly used to denote God's love. The New World Encyclopedia interprets biblical agape as: "a love that is unconditional, self-sacrificing, and chosen by God for humanity through Jesus, which humans are also expected to emulate by exhibiting agape love towards God and each other" ("Agape"). Even though the use of this word in the Bible sometimes carries negative implications as it explains how some men loved the world, its underlying essence remains intact - that of unwavering love. Employing the term agape in its familiar context, allows us to compare our love to that of God's.

Peter might have rejected the capacity to love Christ profoundly (agape), yet a reference to II Timothy 4:10 stating, “Demas has abandoned me, cherishing [agapesas] this current world”, demonstrates that human beings are indeed capable of expressing agape love (as cited in Wynkoop 35). This isn't the lone instance where humans display agape love, implying potential for humans to express divine love even if they opt not to. Wesley was a firm believer in the concept that God is the embodiment of Love. Thus, if God personifies love, comprehending love is intrinsic to understanding God. The most effective method to comprehend something is to implement it and put it into action.

By incarnating love in our actions, we grasp the profound nature of Divine love and, fundamentally, God himself. This concept is affirmed without equivocation in 1 John 4:7-8 of the Bible: “Dear friends, let us

love one another, for love emanates from God. All those who live with love are divinely born and are acquainted with God. Those who do not cultivate love do not comprehend God, for God is love."(Bible). Verse seven has such a seemingly serene and amiable message that instructs us to love and states that everyone who loves is familiar with God. It's tempting to settle on this verse and ignore verse eight. However, verse eight carries a potent message. It implies if you lack love, you don't belong to God. The writer of 1 John doesn't shy away from presenting this hard truth by establishing a clear logical correlation.

If God represents love, it follows that anyone claiming to be of God should display love; conversely, if God represented anger, it would be expected for anyone professing to be of God to also demonstrate anger. Christians who disregard the divine command to love their neighbor are arguably not true to their Christian identity. Of course, it's quite rare for one to openly admit they do not love their neighbor. Nevertheless, this raises the issue of defining who our neighbor is exactly. Soren Kierkegaard, a Protestant theologian, suggests in his work 'Christian Love,' that our neighbor is anyone outside our immediate circle of friends. Our neighbor is whoever we would not instinctively show kindness towards.

Kierkegaard contends that while loving friends and best friends is simple, our Christ-likeness is not reflected when we love a friend. It is loving someone unexpected that evolves into something truly remarkable, even agape. This does not mean close friendships are undesirable. On the contrary, nurturing such relationships is essential for health. But

in order to authentically emulate Christ, we must demonstrate it by loving those outside of our comfort zone, including foes (Brady 196-197). Despite the challenges, comprehending God's love is achievable.

Undeniably, human limitations may prevent a full comprehension of all God's actions, yet we, as finite beings, can grasp the concept of God's love in a theological context. Another perspective to consider is the approach of Mother Theresa, who embodied and enacted love, thereby fostering a stronger connection to God. But how exactly does one personify a life of love? Do they forsake all material possessions and journey to the deprived areas of India or African villages? This could potentially be the path for some individuals, but certainly not for every one. God has designated a unique role for each person; some may serve as missionaries or pastors, some may teach Sunday school, while others might be lawyers, doctors, factory workers or even homemakers.

Divine intervention can take place through anyone, at any location. The only requirement is an open, loving heart. There are those whose divine instructions are to extend love even towards their adversaries. This was certainly the case for Martin Luther King Jr., who had a multitude of adversaries to embrace with love (Brady 213). Yet, unequivocally, the divine is compelling His progeny to tend to His flock, to show kindness to their fellows, to love. The divine doesn't limit love to sporadic, casual participation; it's a devoted and complete engagement. King highlighted during his discussion on the bus boycott that "love must be central to our cause" (qtd Brady 212). This principle should permeate all facets of life. Love must always prevail.