The Evangelical Universalist Forum

Can we love yet dislike?

Practices Christian Living
#81

I couldn’t agree more Johnny! This is why I indicated strong feelings from the outset and this is why I’ve stated that I believe this issue, to me, is as important as the topic of Calvinism.
My three scenarios still stand ( someone suggested a fourth but clearly he either lacks the intellectual capacity to understand the classification system and its ramifications, or he was temporarily blinded by unbridled emotions of ‘Loving whilst disliking’ which is a lesson in itself!).
Obviously, these scenarios are dependent on my common understanding of like/dislike and I believe you are dead right that this is the first and vital issue to deal with.

I’m sorry to hear that you are so busy but Praise be to our blessed (and soundly Christian) Queen for giving us opportunity to take time-out this weekend. Even this year of Jubilee reminds us that God gives us all opportunity for a fresh start and how we need to take that to heart!

#82

I think the poll was added shortly after we started; but come to think of it most such poll discussions start with the poll first and discussions afterward.

Anyway, as far as I can tell Sonia (or whoever) set up the poll so that people can still change their vote on the poll at any time. I just tested by changing my own vote over and back again. :slight_smile:

#83

Yeaaah, I’m going to go with the theory that the person who thinks true love follows from having the proper feelings first, and who indicated his own strong feelings of dislike on the topic from the outset by being shocked and terrified when I defended my opponents against my own dislikes of them, is more likely to have had his intellectual capacities blinded by unbridled emotions resulting in temporary (or even persistent) inabilities to understand what I actually wrote. Including where someone suggested a fourth scenario to his three, which happens not-incidentally to feature a scriptural reference that the shocked and terrified person kept trying to challenge other people on not providing (although other people did in fact occasionally do so, including that same scriptural reference–which this person has not addressed from anyone yet who brought it up.)

But nice try at trying to get the conversation back on track by dismissing with a handwave the only detailed discussion so far on the three scenarios. I’ll leave other thread participants to continue with you if they want–I certainly have many more important things to be spending my time and energy on henceforth. {unregistering from the thread}

#84

To be fair, I should play the teacher here and always assume the best (ie that it was for lack of intellectual capacity which is no slight as we all have differing gifts), therefore, I will explain the error:
My scenarios exactly as stated earlier:

Jasons suggestion (with my translation in colour):

Jason:

Considering that my unqualified apology for any provocation on my part was completely ignored, and that all your posts seem to harp back to a matter that was settled by the Admin team (who said that we had BOTH been provocative) and which must be boring the pants off all other readers, and that I generally reply to your posts in like manner, it is with regret that I think your absence may be for the best.
I seriously want to deal with this thread topic and I have valued the contributions by all other posters.
I am now hopeful that we might make progress, particularly with Johnny’s help and by the grace of God.

#85

Having been pointed back to a reply here by someone else: at least you made extremely brief and dismissive attempts at discussing the only detailed reply to your three-point challenge so far. That counts for something I guess.

If you don’t know what we’re called to do that is more than the pagans and traitors are called to do in the Sermon on the Mount (especially since I talked about that in more detail earlier in that reply from where you quoted me), maybe you shouldn’t play the teacher to someone with my intellectual capacity or lack thereof (whichever the case may be).

My title doesn’t refer to the kinds of feelings I said I didn’t find in the Sermon. It refers to love despite situations that would naturally inspire feelings of dislike (if someone slaps you etc.), and which does not follow from feelings of first liking (if you do good only to those you first like, what more are you doing than non-Christians? Do they not do the same?) Which I do find in the Sermon and gave examples about.

And in hindsight, I should have done that from the beginning after you started this by slapping my face several times out of nowhere: turned the other cheek rather than defending my defenses of my opponents from my disliking of them, which so shocked and terrified you. Maybe you would have realized what I was saying to WAAB instead of what you wanted me to be saying to him.

So in recompense for that, I will voluntarily remove all the parts that bored you (but leave the part you replied to, along with related portions in the part preceding it, too, so the comment trail won’t be broken), and then voluntarily add a warning to the two warnings I permanently keep against myself on my own record, resulting in a voluntary ban of myself from the board for a month. If that helps teach you what I was really saying to WAAB, great; and if not, at least I’ll be less distracted and can get more composition work done for a while. :slight_smile:

So as not to lose the apologies I originally wrote, I’ll reiterate them here: I’m sorry I sarcastically called attention to your sarcastic dismissal of my defense of my opponents from my own dislikes of them (instead of letting it pass by as I ideally should have done); and I’m sorry not only for rhetorically exaggerating when I claimed you were “always ranting” against Calvinists, but for calling (what you later called) your attacks against some of what they believe “ranting” at all. Moreover, I’m glad to hear you have fond feelings for some of them; and if you actually go out of your way on a regular basis to fairly grant them credit on things you agree with them about (at least), then I’m even more glad to hear that.

Also, I waive the claim about you reaching in order to find something to oppose me on; and although I don’t retract the other two charges (although maybe my voluntary ban of myself will somehow help with that more than a detailed explanation of why I made them), I did specifically apologize to you about not paying enough attention (in my original defense against your attacks) to how you were regarding the matter from your perspective; and for forgetting to mention in my original defense that I actually agree that it’s possible, and even popularly normal, for someone to start off emotionally liking someone first, and then coming to love that person later–whether in the merely natural sense of having a stronger emotional state of liking them, or by realizing that the person ought to be actively loved regardless of current emotional states toward the person (keeping in mind that I don’t regard true love as being dependent on feelings of affection toward the other person, which is why I’m putting it like that.)

I’ve still kept my long defense and commentary in slightly earlier drafts on my computer, and they can be provided to whomever whenever upon request. (Just remember I won’t be around for a month to answer requests.)

See you-all in July, and have a good discussion here and elsewhere meanwhile. :slight_smile:

Update: well, crap, the system won’t let me ban myself. Not that I could have tested that beforehand. :wink: Maybe one of the other ad/mods will do it for me. I’ll just delete the hyperlink from my toolbar and mass delete subscription notices from my email until then as a manual workaround. (Since the system won’t let me ban myself, and so also won’t list me as banned, I figured I ought to explain the workaround plan.)

#86

It seems to me that this thread is, with one or two honourable exceptions, the very exemplar of the notion that it is possible to love someone while disliking them. Clearly a number of us here have said things against our brothers in Christ which can only be construed as hostile, confrontational etc.

For me, this is definitive empirical proof that the original question - “can we love yet dislike?” - has been answered in the affirmative.

Would anybody like to argue, in the face of the evidence here on this thread, that loving always and everywhere involves liking - whether that be having brotherly affection towards or merely expressing a preference for?

Shalom

Johnny

#87

Point well taken Johnny! :slight_smile: At least from where I sit. :wink:

Blessings,
Bret

#88

I wasn’t aware, Jason, that one could change one’s vote after having cast it.
I, too, changed mine —— and then back again.

It appears that the many words which Pilgim has posted has not yet convinced anyone.

#89

Without going through through yet another time through all the posts I am coming to a simple conclusion

  1. Agreement with you, John (Pilgrim), as you quote from Romans - love …with affection. I do not see how we can have affection for those we dislike.

  2. But I do agree that we should try to be be - patient with, bless, pray for…those who insult, persecute, hate, those whom we may dislike.

  3. Love in its complete form perhaps is as near as we can get to God’s love for us which equals 1 plus 2 and that I would challenge anyone to achieve for those whom we may dislike. I agree impossible except maybe for the Saints ancient and modern, and extraordinary compassionate people such as Mandela.

I suppose that is why I thought it could be time for another vote!

Michael in Barcelona

#90

Johnny wrote the following on another thread in reply to my opinion on the “love whilst disliking” issue and I have copied it here:

#91

DaveF posted:

Hear, hear!

What happened to Jesus at Golgotha was not the wrath or hatred of God towards him as an individual or as a representative for the world. It was the abandonment, the indifference of God that Jesus experienced. Is this even possible? Is YHWH (“I will prove to be what I will prove to be”) who is agape, ever indifferent to His beloved other-- the creation? Or rather, does He prove to be the One who will faithfully expended the full measure of His life to reach into the the depths of the godforsaken despair of those who feel that they have been discarded into the trash dump of Gehenna. How many nameless, anonymous, countless others throughout history are numbered among those godless, forgotten, nobodies? Their pain, their despair, their suicides; where living another moment in this world, as it is, is more unbearable then the unknown of death.
And yet, if you were to trawl through this thread you would discover that some of the posters believe that ‘agape love’ can, indeed, be accompanied by indifference towards the one to whom the love is aimed. {ie there need be no emotional component whatsoever as they believe that ‘agape’ has no emotional component but is no more than acting for the welfare of the other!}

I didn’t know that. Thank you.

(my bold)
I’m not sure why anything you have said prior to my bold, explains your statement in bold. If you had said, ‘ayape is more than being liked’ then I could have understood and agreed. We are ‘the apple of His eye’. That’s quite a poetic way of describing intense affection towards.

#92

Dear Pilgrim and Stuart

I am transferring the exchange of posts from your thread Stuart as this exchange is more related to this thread . To understand the last post in the exchange I have started the post here with a couple of posts from yourselves as it is to these posts that mine was a “frank and friendly” response.
Michael in Barcelona

Here we go!

stuartd wrote:
part of my point pilgrim is that if we were ‘‘more like Jesus’’ quiet possibly the only ones who would be infuriated with us and possibly want to slap us would be those who claim to represent GOD, perhaps its just me but I seem to have the ability perhaps to some extent the desire to make christians hate me

Pilgrim wrote to Stuart::
You are not alone my brother in Christ and fellow traveler.

Isn’t it true that it was (in main) the religious people who hated Christ and gave Him much grief because He would not follow their social morays etc? I don’t think you or I should be surprised by religious folk hating us.
Didn’t Richard Dawkins say words to the effect that a person who wants to be bad, can easily be so, but it takes religion to turn a person who wants to be good into a thoroughly bad person?
Only religious people could come up with the obnoxious idea that one can love another person whilst at the same time hating them (“disliking” them). It is a fact that the majority of people active on this forum actually believe and promote this idea.
viewtopic.php?f=38&t=3118
I remain shocked and appalled by the idea that any so called ‘christian’ can convince herself that she is loving with a godly love whilst consciously and contentedly harbouring feelings of hatred towards another soul. I think it is a cop-out.

We all find people in our lives who we admire deeply for their fruit (regardless of what badge they wear ). If we are highly respected by these people, whose lives are an example to us all, then let the religious hate us (whilst loving ), let them throw their stones, enough for us that we are true to ourselves and to the God we serve in good conscience.
God bless you
unquote

fmichaeld wrote and stuart replied within the text

I am no scholar so please take this just as a frank and friendly personal comment:

  1. Certainly in the Gospels it comes across quite clearly that Jesus was hated by the religious leaders, but I think you are a bit misleading in saying it was because He did not follow their social morays, etc. The etc!? It was His claim to be the Messiah, Son of God, and His answers when challenged for healing on the Sabbath, forgivng the prostitute; for so many things that put an entirely new light on God, for example God’s love inclusive not exclusive to the “chosen” etc etc, love your enemies and so on. Further they hated him because they feared for their own positions of power. Well I am sure you agree with this anyway and are well versed in the Biblical references!!. He also spoke of joy!

Stuart wrote
correct it doesn’t however discount the angle I have put forward !

fmichaeldw continues
I think the position now is very different to then. Christianity, Christians, the Christian Churches etc cannot be compared with the religious situation of the Jews when Christ came with Good News.

stuart wrote
now here is where I disagree with you !, YES there are differences but there are also similarities !, the obvious one being exclusivity but I believe there are other similarities also.

fmichaeldw continues
He would find Himself in a partially Christian, partially multi-faith, and partially secular environment. How He would act, how Christians would act is pure speculation :question: .God alone knows! [Stuart inserted the orange question mark!]

  1. Religious folk hating you and Stuart - that is sad, so sad.

stuart wrote
perhaps ‘‘hating’’ is in most cases too strong a word but I have to say that I have encountered a percentage of christians who have become enraged when even gently confronted with their precious beliefs

fmichaeld continues
4. Do you and Stuart really believe that there are religious people, Christians, on this Forum who would hound Christ out of the Forum. If you really do as you have said before and implied in your post, I’m afraid you have misunderstood me as in I’m not that firm on the outcome but it still comes back to the gist of my original post - being ‘‘more like Jesus’’ only seems to upset those who claim to represent GOD then my friends, that saddens me, and it saddens me your comments about hatred or resentment towards yourselves. This is an exciting and stimulating brotherly sisterly loving forum, debates are debates, and there will always be differences, but hatred? Don’t believe it, dear Brothers.

It is this sadness why I am writing this to you,

With love ,

Michael in Barcelona

#93

Hello again PIlgrim and Stuart,

Sorry an error in quoting the para 4 in my post few mins ago

It should read:fmichaeld continues
4. Do you and Stuart really believe that there are religious people, Christians, on this Forum who would hound Christ out of the Forum. If you really do as you have said before and implied in your post, (Stuart inserts I’m afraid you have misunderstood me as in I’m not that firm on the outcome but it still comes back to the gist of my original post - being ‘‘more like Jesus’’ only seems to upset those who claim to ment towards yourselves. This is an exciting and stimulating brotherly sisterly loving forum, debates are debates, and therepresent GOD) fmdw continues then my friends, that saddens me, and it saddens me your comments about hatred or resentre will always be differences, but hatred? Don’t believe it, dear Brothers.

It is this sadness why I am writing this to you,

Cheers

Michael inBarcelona

#94

Dear Pilgrim and Stuart.

Oh dear my correction was totally muddled :blush: so here is the whole post again this time including para 4 properly corrected…age is creeping in I am afraid to this brother! :unamused:

I am transferring the exchange of posts from your thread Stuart as this exchange is more related to this thread . To understand the last post in the exchange I have started the post here with a couple of posts from yourselves as it is to these posts that mine was a “frank and friendly” response.
Michael in Barcelona

Here we go!

stuartd wrote:
part of my point pilgrim is that if we were ‘‘more like Jesus’’ quiet possibly the only ones who would be infuriated with us and possibly want to slap us would be those who claim to represent GOD, perhaps its just me but I seem to have the ability perhaps to some extent the desire to make christians hate me

Pilgrim wrote to Stuart::
You are not alone my brother in Christ and fellow traveler.

Isn’t it true that it was (in main) the religious people who hated Christ and gave Him much grief because He would not follow their social morays etc? I don’t think you or I should be surprised by religious folk hating us.
Didn’t Richard Dawkins say words to the effect that a person who wants to be bad, can easily be so, but it takes religion to turn a person who wants to be good into a thoroughly bad person?
Only religious people could come up with the obnoxious idea that one can love another person whilst at the same time hating them (“disliking” them). It is a fact that the majority of people active on this forum actually believe and promote this idea.
viewtopic.php?f=38&t=3118
I remain shocked and appalled by the idea that any so called ‘christian’ can convince herself that she is loving with a godly love whilst consciously and contentedly harbouring feelings of hatred towards another soul. I think it is a cop-out.

We all find people in our lives who we admire deeply for their fruit (regardless of what badge they wear ). If we are highly respected by these people, whose lives are an example to us all, then let the religious hate us (whilst loving ), let them throw their stones, enough for us that we are true to ourselves and to the God we serve in good conscience.
God bless you
unquote

fmichaeld wrote and stuart replied within the text

I am no scholar so please take this just as a frank and friendly personal comment:

  1. Certainly in the Gospels it comes across quite clearly that Jesus was hated by the religious leaders, but I think you are a bit misleading in saying it was because He did not follow their social morays, etc. The etc!? It was His claim to be the Messiah, Son of God, and His answers when challenged for healing on the Sabbath, forgivng the prostitute; for so many things that put an entirely new light on God, for example God’s love inclusive not exclusive to the “chosen” etc etc, love your enemies and so on. Further they hated him because they feared for their own positions of power. Well I am sure you agree with this anyway and are well versed in the Biblical references!!. He also spoke of joy!

Stuart wrote
correct it doesn’t however discount the angle I have put forward !

fmichaeldw continues
I think the position now is very different to then. Christianity, Christians, the Christian Churches etc cannot be compared with the religious situation of the Jews when Christ came with Good News.

stuart wrote
now here is where I disagree with you !, YES there are differences but there are also similarities !, the obvious one being exclusivity but I believe there are other similarities also.

fmichaeldw continues
He would find Himself in a partially Christian, partially multi-faith, and partially secular environment. How He would act, how Christians would act is pure speculation .God alone knows! [Stuart inserted the orange question mark!]

  1. Religious folk hating you and Stuart - that is sad, so sad.

stuart wrote
perhaps ‘‘hating’’ is in most cases too strong a word but I have to say that I have encountered a percentage of christians who have become enraged when even gently confronted with their precious beliefs

fmichaeld continues
4. Do you and Stuart really believe that there are religious people, Christians, on this Forum who would hound Christ out of the Forum. If you really do as you have said before and implied in your post, Stuart inserts - I’m afraid you have misunderstood me as in I’m not that firm on the outcome but it still comes back to the gist of my original post - being ‘‘more like Jesus’’ only seems to upset those who claim to represent GOD then my friends), fmdw continues that saddens me, and it saddens me your comments about hatred or resentment towards yourselves. This is an exciting and stimulating brotherly sisterly loving forum, debates are debates, and there will always be differences, but hatred? Don’t believe it, dear Brothers.

It is this sadness why I am writing this to you,

With love ,

Michael in Barcelona
fmichaeldw

Posts: 92
Joined: Mon Jul 04, 2011 10:44 am

#95

Johnny:

Would you please quote the interactions from this thread which led you to this conclusion?

If you look back, I have agreed that it is essential for us to define our terms and have asked you for a definition of ‘dislike’
In particular, I asked for how you see the term ‘dislike’ being used and what it means in the context of where it was introduced (ie in the forgiveness thread which started this whole issue).
So, for the second time, please tell me how you see ‘dislike’ and its counter ‘like’ in the context used.

I fail to see how you can accuse me of determination to conflate, given what I have asked for.

#96

John

I had thought we - by which I meant all participants in this thread, not just you and me - were “getting somewhere” because a number of people, eg Bret and Michael, voiced their agreement with at least some of the points argued. You yourself commented, “I am now hopeful that we might make progress, particularly with Johnny’s help and by the grace of God.”

Fair enough?

I have repeatedly and clearly defined what I mean by ‘liking’ as opposed to agape ‘loving’. I don’t see what relevance the original context has to the discussion at the point it has reached now. My view of liking and disliking is applicable in any context - including the clear real life example of Brady and Hindley I gave in my last post .

But for the sake of clarity I will reiterate that in *any *context - including, if you insist, the context of trying to forgive somebody who has grossly wronged me by making sexual advances to my wife - I believe it is possible to love somebody with agape love without ‘liking’ them. And by ‘liking’ I mean *both * having a preference for their company *and * feeling affectionate towards them. If I like somebody it means I get on with them, I enjoy spending time with them, because we have shared interests, shared ideals, shared passions.

I for one would not ‘like’, not enjoy spending time with, somebody who had tried to cuckold me. Neither, I suspect, would you.

Again, I cite the example of Myra Hindley. As long as she remains a person who likes to get her jollies torturing and murdering young children I will continue to dislike her. I will also struggle mightily to agape her, as I am commanded by Jesus. But as I said earlier, I am not commanded to like her. This is not “begging the question”. It is a statement of plain fact. If you disagree, show me the scripture which commands me to enjoy the company of, or feel affectionate towards, people who commit acts of gross wickedness and cruelty. (And yes, I know Hindley is dead, and that she allegedly repented of her crimes. I’m talking about what she did while she was alive and unrepentant. It is an extreme example, but it focuses the mind on the issue at hand.)

So, I hold that in my best moments I can agape Hindley without in any way liking her.

Fair enough?

Now, you define agape love as necessarily having an emotional component, a degree of affection towards the person loved, do you not? Indeed, you take other posters on this thread, including me, to task for believing that “agape has no emotional component but is no more than acting for the welfare of the other".

Well, I will say only in passing that I never said that agape love never or necessarily doesn’t have an emotional component – only that it need not always do so. In other words, while it is possible for us to agape somebody without liking them, most of the time when we agape a person we also like them, probably quite a lot, also.

But under your eccentric and dogmatic definition of both agape ‘loving’ and ‘liking’ as having a necessarily emotional component, it is clearly not possible for me to agape Hindley while also failing to like her. This is what I mean by saying that you “seem determined” to conflate the two terms – to the point where, as I have said, they become practically synonymous. Rendering the original question of ‘can we love yet dislike?’ effectively as ‘can we love yet not love?’ Palpable nonsense.

And steady on with the accusation language, please John. I didn’t “accuse” you of anything, I merely asserted that you “seem determined to conflate loving and liking” – a perception which you have done nothing to alter.

You might wish to reflect on the implication of your own admission that you “remain shocked and appalled by the idea that any so called ‘christian’ can convince herself that she is loving with a godly love whilst consciously and contentedly harbouring feelings of hatred towards another soul”.

Call me old fashioned, but I’d say that to ‘accuse’, in so many words, a brother or sister in Christ of having a bogus or inferior faith merely because they disagree with your particular, minority, definition of agape love is both offensive and, dare I say, rather arrogant. Indeed, this assertion of yours provokes me into speaking rather more forcefully than I would otherwise wish, you being a fellow Brit and all that. It’s just not cricket old boy!

And one final thing, why do you insist on defining ‘disliking’ as meaning the same thing as ‘hating’? The two words are not synonymous. End of.

It appears it is all indeed a question of semantics.

All the best

Johnny

#97

Johnny,

I’d have to say that I agree with you. And yes, it IS possible for me to love someone and not like them… as in I don’t choose to have them over for dinner, or come over for a cup of coffee, or interact with them socially. It merely means I am not fond of their company is all. I do not particularly like their form of politcs, religion, and their “potty” mouths (surprising there as I have one myself), their lack of respect for my familial situation, the list goes on ad infinitum. So yes, I can love them and would be there for them in a crisis situation, I DO pray for them (that they be blessed, have peace and abundance, etc.), and I don’t wish them any ill will, I just choose to not put myself in a place where contempt can breed. And YES, I do have a couple in mind. I do love them, but they are not fun to be around nor is it a blessing for either of us as our differences are so great. So maybe I’m NOT as evolved as some, maybe I have a lot to work on inside myself, maybe I have NOT arrived at perfection in my loving, BUT, for my own sanity, I stay away from certain folks as I just plain don’t like them. And to me, there is a huge difference between love and like. I love my in-laws, but I sure as heck don’t like them much for the way they treat their son!!! Guess that’s all I have to say on the subject, and I don’t think I’ll be adding anything more to this topic as it appears this poor dead horse has been beaten beyond recognizable!!! The only thing I see left to do is to agree to disagree. Maybe we should just let this topic die a normal death before folks start really hurting each other and saying hurtful, unkind, and malicous things about one another. That would NOT seem to Christ like to me. So shoot me IF I don’t “like” someone, but God willing, I can love them and see them as a brother and sister in Christ. One more thing, I do have an older sister that I love dearly… but we do not like each other. Last time we spoke was ten years ago when my dad died… we both spoke at his funeral, haven’t talked since. And yes, contrary to what the opposition here might say, I DO love her very much!!! Ok, I’m done with this, seems we have really worn it out and people are tired of the bickering around symantics. sigh.

Blessings to each of you, and that is said with love and NOT necessarily like.

Bret

#98

No. Not at all. What you said was this:

It is quite clear that you had thought that my stance may have changed, and I, quite fairly asked this:

(ie your evidence that my stance had changed)
But you have not, and I can only conclude that cannot find any support for your conclusion. If I am wrong, then all you have to do is quote the relevant statements. That is what the quote button is for. It is extremely useful for just such as this and I repeat my request.

You have certainly stated that the word ‘like’ has many connotations and so I find it quite incomprehensible why you wish to separate it from context. I for one, have used it continually in this thread as it was used in the context originally.

I disagree with your statement “having a preference for”. There is no need to introduce comparisons in the definition of like. It muddies the waters and is unnecessary.
I agree with your statement “having affection for/towards them” and it is commanded in the NT that we should have affection for each other.

You talk of me conflating? There is no need to insist on shared interests and shared passions. This goes beyond “affection towards” which is a simple and clear definition.
Your apparent need to go beyond simple “like” is interesting.

Again, it is interesting that you again go beyond “liking” to “liking to spend time with”. The English itself clearly demonstrates how you wish to extend the simple definition of “having affection for” to “having affection for spending time with”.
As for “cuckold”, I am not familiar with the word but if you mean, would I want to spend time with someone who has wronged me, the answer is (or should be from a christian viewpoint IMO) yes! I would want to get to know them better and hope that they would get to know me better so that we can understand each other and any causes of differences.

No. Not at all but I must go. I would ‘like’ to deal with your Hindley example in a separate post.

All the best Johnny

#99

yes.

I don’t like the term “take to task”. Sufficient to say that I disagree. We are all entitled to our opinions even if they are shocking.

I never said otherwise of you.

That is the position I have always understood of those who are my ‘opposers’ in this thread.

Eccentric and dogmatic??
It is true that I am in a minority on this thread, but I’m not sure that my definitions are ‘eccentric’ . So be it but “dogmatic”? Do you mean dogmatic about definitions? We both agreed that it would be important to be clear about definitions. Is that being ‘dogmatic’? If so, bring it on.

You have stated that my apparant ‘conflation’ is with ‘determination’. That means that I am willfully, deliberately and persistantly doing something wrong.
I assure you that if I am guilty of conflation it is not a deliberate act on my part and I do not see how you can disagree with what is in my heart. I hopethat explains my reaction. I assure you that I hold you in very high regard and value your input.

I’ve got to go. I want to deal with Hindley asap

God bless you Johnny

#100

If one 'google’s agape definition it is clear that I am not in a minority when it comes to ‘agape’ having an ‘affection’ component: