{"id":1866,"date":"2009-12-14T09:16:33","date_gmt":"2009-12-14T16:16:33","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/thomasjayoord.com\/index.php\/blog\/archives\/an_open_god_that_necessarily_loves_us"},"modified":"2015-01-13T10:59:55","modified_gmt":"2015-01-13T10:59:55","slug":"an_open_god_that_necessarily_loves_us","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/thomasjayoord.com\/index.php\/blog\/archives\/an_open_god_that_necessarily_loves_us","title":{"rendered":"God Can\u2019t Help But Love Us"},"content":{"rendered":"<p>Many Christians believe God does not necessarily relate to creatures. God at one time (or before time) existed alone &ndash; albeit as Trinity. Yet these same Christians believe they can count on God to love them. I don&rsquo;t think there are good grounds to believe both ideas.<\/p>\n<p>If nothing external to God forces God to love creation (a belief I think wise to affirm) and nothing internal to God makes it the case the God must love creation (a belief I reject), God could and may easily decide to stop loving creation.<\/p>\n<p>The solution is to believe that God&#8217;s eternal and unchanging nature includes continual love for creatures.<\/p>\n<p>If God&rsquo;s nature does not include love for creation, God could simply stop loving creatures at 7am tomorrow and start hating instead. There is no reason &ndash; not even belief in God itself &ndash; to think God will continue loving.<img loading=\"lazy\" decoding=\"async\" height=\"166\" src=\"https:\/\/thomasjayoord.com\/wp-content\/uploads\/2009\/12\/washington_d.c_2191.jpg\" style=\"border: 2px solid black; margin: 8px; float: right;\" width=\"248\" \/><\/p>\n<p>Denying that God&rsquo;s nature includes love for creation also means that God may have not acted lovingly at various times in the past.<\/p>\n<p>In short, those who want to argue consistently that God always loves creation need to change their view of God&rsquo;s relation to the world. Instead of saying God&rsquo;s relation to the world is entirely voluntary, arbitrary, or accidental to God&rsquo;s nature, they should say that God necessarily loves the world. To love creation is part of what it means to be God.<\/p>\n<p>I like to ask people two diagnostic questions about God&rsquo;s love for us. The answers given these questions indicate, in my mind, that many people are inconsistent in their view of God&rsquo;s love. The first question is this:<\/p>\n<p>1.&nbsp;&nbsp; <em>Could <\/em>God stop loving us?<em><\/em><\/p>\n<p>Most people answer this question with &ldquo;yes&rdquo; (although I do not). Most think God&rsquo;s love for the world is freely chosen in all respects, and God could decide to stop loving creatures if God chose to do so.<\/p>\n<p>God &ldquo;sovereignly chooses to love the world,&rdquo; my friend, Clark Pinnock, would say. The answer most people give this first question aligns with his words. God&rsquo;s love is &ldquo;free from every necessity in respect to its object,&rdquo; Karl Barth would say.<\/p>\n<p>I subsequently ask people this question:<\/p>\n<p>2.&nbsp;&nbsp; <em>Would <\/em>God stop loving us?<\/p>\n<p>Almost everyone answers this question with &ldquo;no&rdquo; (and I agree). But the people who think God <em>could<\/em> stop loving us have no justification for thinking God <em>would<\/em> <em>not<\/em> stop loving us.<\/p>\n<p>If they believe God&rsquo;s nature does not necessarily include love for creation, these friends have no grounds for believing God will continually love them.<\/p>\n<p>To say it another way, there is no reason to think God will continue loving us and not start hating us if God&rsquo;s eternal nature does not include love for the world.<\/p>\n<p>Sometimes, I ask as a follow-up question,<\/p>\n<p>3.&nbsp;&nbsp; <em>Why<\/em> are you so confident God would always love us?<\/p>\n<p>Most people say something like this, &ldquo;I am confident God would not stop loving me, because to stop loving me would mean God isn&rsquo;t acting like God.&rdquo;<\/p>\n<p>This answer, in my mind, reveals that most people really <em>do<\/em> think God&rsquo;s love for the world is an essential element in God&rsquo;s nature. The phrase &ldquo;God isn&rsquo;t acting like God&rdquo; (and its equivalents) suggests this.<\/p>\n<p>People actually do think God&rsquo;s love for us is a necessary aspect of what it means to be God: God&rsquo;s essence. But they also want to account for a dimension of freedom in God&rsquo;s love.<\/p>\n<p>I think people are right to want to affirm both truths. But they need another way to do so.<\/p>\n<p>My way is to say the fact <em>that <\/em>God loves the world is necessary as a part of God&rsquo;s nature.&nbsp; But <em>how <\/em>God loves the world is freely chosen in God&rsquo;s moment-by-moment relationship with creation.<\/p>\n<p>My alternative does not mean we have to reject the Trinitarian theology of Pinnock and Barth.&nbsp; We can accept a social Trinity of mutual love.&nbsp; But we need to add the doctrine that God has always and necessarily related to creatures.<\/p>\n<p>Instead of choosing either that God necessarily loves in Trinity or that God necessarily loves creatures, I affirm both doctrines.&nbsp; And this provides more robust support for the central biblical claim, &ldquo;God is love.&rdquo;<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>Many Christians believe God does not necessarily relate to creatures. God at one time (or before time) existed alone &ndash; albeit as Trinity. Yet these same Christians believe they can count on God to love them. I don&rsquo;t think there are good grounds to believe both ideas.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[9],"tags":[],"yst_prominent_words":[1312,1321,1320,1319,1318,1317,1316,1315,1314,1313,1302,1311,1310,1309,1308,1307,1306,1305,1304,1303],"class_list":["post-1866","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-open_and_relational_theology"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/thomasjayoord.com\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/1866","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/thomasjayoord.com\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/thomasjayoord.com\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/thomasjayoord.com\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/1"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/thomasjayoord.com\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=1866"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/thomasjayoord.com\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/1866\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/thomasjayoord.com\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=1866"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/thomasjayoord.com\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=1866"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/thomasjayoord.com\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=1866"},{"taxonomy":"yst_prominent_words","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/thomasjayoord.com\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/yst_prominent_words?post=1866"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}