Do we need to love people?

Without people like Saint, we would have Nazi cold science...all for the sake of science, no need for ethics.

Nonsense. Christian morality is antiquated in modern western society. Ours is a secular moral system. Concepts of gender and racial equality simply do not exist in the monotheistic religions.
 
Even Jesus didn't expect everyone to love everyone: he was hoping for basic, non-violent tolerance. The word 'love' can be understood in many ways, including a vulgar, carnal sense that involves no affection or respect and a theological sense that doesn't, either. He may have meant something like: See that the other guy is just like you, and bear with his imperfections.
As a third-generation atheist I'm hardly an expert on Christianity. That said, nonetheless as a linguist I'm rather certain that he was using "love" in opposition to "hate." And remember that the New Testament was written in Greek, which has two words for love: eros for passionate carnal love, and agape for the love that we feel for our friends. Whenever you read a translation of a document, you have to settle for the likelihood that you're not getting exactly what the original says.

I'm sure Jesus did not expect us to be sexually attracted to our dogs or our favorite athletes or our president or even our priests--especially if we're both the same sex, although I'll go out on a limb and suggest that he would tell us to love gay people and therefore he would not object if a gay man feels sexual attraction for President Obama.

But back on topic, he specifically wanted us to love the sick and the poor and the downtrodden. That sure sounds like agape to me.

Saint, have you ever thought of going to a religion/bible forum and asking all these questions instead of a science forum??
You should see the questions he asks on the Linguistics board. ;) Frankly I suspect that he wants the kind of answers he gets here, rather than the kind he'll get on a forum populated primarily by people who are so religious that they hang out on religious discussion boards.

The only time I stumbled into one of those places, a pastor was explaining to a mother why it would be okay to lie to her children and assure them that their recently-deceased dog will indeed be waiting for them in heaven, even though proper Christian adults know that non-human animals have no souls and therefore no afterlife.

Will Rogers said:
If dogs don't go to Heaven, then when I die I want to go where they went.

Amen to that, Brother Will.
 
Love can't oppose hate. Is love plus, hate minus in you heads? I think mother and father, and the ever bonding hate, pure, and strong.
 
As Jesus said: Love your neighbour as yourself.

Do we need to love ALL people?

No

But we can respect and honour there lives , if they deserve such

The fundamental problem with love is that it is an emotion

Therefore can be twisted and manipulated

Respect and honour are what they are
 
As Jesus said: Love your neighbour as yourself.

Do we need to love ALL people?

Depends on what you mean by ''love''.
Based on the gospels, I'm quite sure Jesus' meaning of ''love'' differs from the current mainstream ideas.

jan.
 
I think that honesty is so much more important than loveto the betterment of mankind. Maybe that's just me.
Only if it serves some purpose, If we are talking about pure altruistic "love" than I don't see any possibility of that behavior occurring on a global scale.
Or even on an individual scale. I've neither met nor heard of a pure altruist. Ever. You can't care about a killer as much as you do for his/her next victim. Maybe that killer is suffering in some way that gives him the need to kill others. If you lock him up, it causes more suffering. If there was a way to change this situation, ther wouldn't be any killers or rapists.
Saint, have you ever thought of going to a religion/bible forum and asking all these questions instead of a science forum??
Sure, the question was asked with a bit of religious context to it, but it's still something worth pondering. Many ethics systems have a similar ideal.
 
Coming back to this post, it makes no sense at all, so I am deleting what is posted and replacing it with something else.

Love is something that has to come from within, and if hate is within, that is what come out. Understanding love goes with being forgiving, tolerant, and having a capacity for joy. Jesus also said for us to take the splinter out of our own eye, before trying to remove one from someone else's. Jesus commanded us to heal ourselves. Before we can be good for anyone, we have to do these things and find the love within ourselves.
 
Last edited:
Nonsense. Christian morality is antiquated in modern western society. Ours is a secular moral system. Concepts of gender and racial equality simply do not exist in the monotheistic religions.


I think you are missing an understanding of cause and effect. Christian morality is as good as it ever was. Perhaps you can provide a moral that you think doesn't make sense to us today.
 
As Jesus said: Love your neighbour as yourself.

Do we need to love ALL people?
yes, you need to love humanity, AKA society, in general.
love for any particular person "just happens" although it might take some work.
 
As Jesus said: Love your neighbour as yourself.

Do we need to love ALL people?

We should. Here is a way to look at it - wish to fight against unconscious, harmful things to our lives like hunger, disease, and the mental state of not knowing. Each of us gets beat by these things even as we fight among ourselves, which is tragic. So feel compassion as best as you can for sentient beings in their struggle to survive and to have significance. We should love them at least somewhat like we should love ourselves, even though it likely can't be the same love, as Rodereve said.
 
Minus away the meta huha, the definition thumpers and religious zealots.

I love my brother because it increases my basic survival chances.

Even now without the need for it, its still good to practice it purely for selfish reasons.
 
Back
Top