Is God our lover?

[Guest]

As long as we distinguish between romantic ("I'm a hopeless romantic") and erotic (creepy), then I'll say I do have, at times, a certain romantic, sentimental feeling about God.

I can't tell you how many times, just sitting around the house, I see my wonderful wife reading, or watching TV, or doing some household chore, that I realize, "God did this for us!" and I whisper a little prayer of thanks.

And, as I think about it, since my wife is in Christ, I suppose that, in a way, my love for God does emcompass all the conotations... I guess, maybe, in a way, sort of, perhaps.

Perry

[Guest]

Are you saying the same thing I said above the quote? Or are you saying that there is a committee of women who are dictating what is included in the songbook?

No Vast XX-Chromosome Conspiracy theory here. I think it's a natural outcropping of the fact that the church is majority female these days. Look around your church and identify two men who are sitting, sans wife, with their kids. Then look for twenty women in similar circumstances.

BTW, I go to a very large church, but scale the numbers however they fit. Figure 1/10.

It's really just evidence of the church as another marketplace. Cater to your customer.

[Guest]

Perry & Michelle,

Don't know why but just now saw how funny your last posts were...BBL, cawfee

[Guest]

perry wrote:

I'll say I do have, at times, a certain romantic, sentimental feeling about God.

i hear what you are saying- i think we are just using different terms. i experienced a rather overwhelming sense of God's love the other day while I was reading a book called "The Jesus Creed" by Scot McKnight. he was writing about God's love for us and it just really struck me and made me say "wow," for lack of a more descriptive term.

TK

[Guest]

What I get from scripture is that the love from God is grace since he is so far above us as Lord and King. We love him back but to be intimate friends I don't believe it is an equal relationship.

[Guest]

Does not God use the imagery of a lover in describing his relationship with his people? Q.v., Ezekiel 16:7-8.

"Lover" does not necessarily imply an illicit status, and there is something worthy of regard about the romantic model for relationship - that profound, needful desire for intimacy and mutual possession (cf. Song of Songs 2:16a/6:3a) and caregiving...


Shalom,
Emmet

[Guest]

Does not God use the imagery of a lover in describing his relationship with his people? Q.v., Ezekiel 16:7-8.

"Lover" does not necessarily imply an illicit status, and there is something worthy of regard about the romantic model for relationship - that profound, needful desire for intimacy and mutual possession (cf. Song of Songs 2:16a/6:3a) and caregiving...


Shalom,
Emmet

Hi Emmet,

It's good to see you again.

I agree that "lover" does not necessarily imply an illicit status, but, to me at least, it seems private and personal. The verses in Ezekiel make me squeamish -- perhaps it's because of my upbringing.

This may be off the wall, but when I read your post and then re-read this discussion, I was reminded of an old thread where you talked about how disgusting the cannibalistic images in the Eucharist would be to Jews. What I got to thinking is: perhaps God is purposefully offensive at times. Why he would be, I'm not sure; but if so, it does tend to get my attention.

[Guest]

Hello, Michelle,

Thank you for your kind response .

I agree that "lover" does not necessarily imply and illicit status, but, to me at least, it seems private and personal.

Which is an asset of the paradigm, I think.

The verses in Ezekiel make me squeamish -- perhaps it's because of my upbringing.

This may be off the wall, but when I read your post and then re-read this discussion, I was reminded of an old thread where you talked about how disgusting the cannibalistic images in the Eucharist would be to Jews. What I got to thinking is: perhaps God is purposefully offensive at times. Why he would be, I'm not sure, but if so, it does tend to get my attention.

I appreciate your reference, and I would not dispute the possibility that God may be "purposefully offensive at times." I will point out the distinction, though, that Ezekiel 16 was not written for a post-Victorian/post-Augustinian audience, whereas the Eucharist was articulated directly to a Jewish audience. I think the social context for Ezekiel 16's audience would have received the imagery in ways somewhat different to our own. For example, issues of social honor and shame attendant to cuckolding would probably have been more pronounced for such an audience.


Shalom,
Emmet