Which are the attributes of God?

If you are here saying that Love is what makes God, well, God, have you not then again distanced love from humans? For you are surely not saying that someone who love perfectly would become a god are you?

Thomas, what I am saying is that 'Love' and 'self-existence' are mutually exclusive. My previous post relates more meaning on 'self-existence'and the issue here we are dealing with.

John, it appears to me you just repeated what you wrote earlier. I'm asking a specific question, which is if you are asserting that "Jehovah, the self-existent One" is describing a concept which is simply not found in the Scriptures, or one which is contrary to what the Scriptures teach (which is a stronger thing to assert). The term "not Scriptural" is ambiguous, as it can be taken either way. Simply repeating the phrase doesn't help clear the ambiguity.

By James:
Does not agape need an equal object to love? Without an equal object to love, agape does not exist.
Unquote.

By John.
No, agape most certainly does not need an equal object to love, and it does exist without an object to love.

Second; agape requiring an object to love:
Agape exists in the heart of him who loves; it is not dependent on the object of its love.
Unquote.

I understand agape love is unselfish love, a love that seeks no self, a love that has no self in it. The question is: how is it possible to know this kind of love and to have this love in your heart when you are all alone?

When God is wandering all alone before Christ was brought forth, how could we accept Him as a God that His love is unselfish, when all He can do and know is to love him self?

I do not believe and can’t accept a single god who claimed that he is unselfish, that his love seeks no self while all what he knew and could do is to love him self.

Unselfish love I believe could only exist and experienced when there is some one to love, when there is an object to love, to make this object happy. Without the existence of an object to love, some one to love, to make this object happy, there would be only selfish love, or the love for self.

And I do believe that Adam has this unselfish love when he was created even there is no Eve, because he was created in the image of God and after his likeness, he was created with an unselfish heart to love God the way God loves him.

In His love

James S

But combining my line of thought and John’s line of thought, I can accept that after Christ was brought forth, God learn what unselfish love is because now He has an object to love. In the passing years of eternity, they wandered together and learning to know and to grasp what unselfish love is; what agape is.

Since they learnt about agape, the creation of angles and man and the mission of Christ to die in saving men got an answer, which is to prove to each others between them, what unselfih love really is!

This idea makes sense to me.

There is always a question unanswered within me, what is the purpose of creation, when God knows before hand that Lucifer would sin, that Adam would sin?

This is God and His Son’s way to test each other love , whether their love is unselfish, whether they are willing to sacrifice with the risk of eternal lost and failure in mission and in their love.

It makes sense, right?

In His love

James S

Tom, I have given a ‘specifically defined answer’ to your question relating to the concept. I quote:

“This (self-existence) is diametrically opposed (contrary) to the scriptural concept (teaching) of ‘life’, and especially so of ‘eternal life’.”

additional context may be found above.

Thanks for the clarification.

I'm a bit uncomfortable with the idea that Ellen White wrote something which is diametrically opposed to Scripture. I realize she states she was not infallible (as no human is), but I do believe she was inspired. I don't believe in verbal inspiration, as fundamentalists believe, but am not comfortable in going as far as it appears you are.

Do you believe it is possible that one of the authors of Scripture could express something which is diametrically opposed to Scripture? This seems like a silly question, after posting it. It appears to me that you must either believe Ellen White was not inspired, or her inspiration is of a different character than that of the Scripture writers.

You may comment on this if you wish, or skip it if you prefer.

Let me go on to another question. You spoke of "crucial thought concepts" and suggested that if one could not express a concept using language which is not in Scripture, then it must be an idea that no writer of Scripture had. Do you understand that these crucial thought concepts are ideas which must be diametrially opposed to Scripture, or might they simply be a concept which is true, but not one that a Scripture writer enunciated?