Why there is no obligation to love God
The first and greatest commandment according to Jesus, and so the one most central to Christian practice, is the command to love God. We argue that this commandment is best interpreted in aretaic rather than deontic terms. In brief, we argue that there is no obligation to love God. While bad, failur...
| Authors: | ; |
|---|---|
| Format: | Electronic Article |
| Language: | English |
| Check availability: | HBZ Gateway |
| Journals Online & Print: | Drawer...
|
| Fernleihe: | Fernleihe für die Fachinformationsdienste |
| Published: |
Cambridge Univ. Press
2024
|
| In: |
Religious studies
Year: 2024, Volume: 60, Issue: 1, Pages: 77-88 |
| Further subjects: | B
obligations and rights
B enforceable claims B Relations of intimacy B LOVE of God B the suberogatory B Autonomy B Hell |
| Online Access: |
Volltext (lizenzpflichtig) Volltext (lizenzpflichtig) |
MARC
| LEADER | 00000caa a22000002 4500 | ||
|---|---|---|---|
| 001 | 188055335X | ||
| 003 | DE-627 | ||
| 005 | 20240213144633.0 | ||
| 007 | cr uuu---uuuuu | ||
| 008 | 240212s2024 xx |||||o 00| ||eng c | ||
| 024 | 7 | |a 10.1017/S0034412523000021 |2 doi | |
| 035 | |a (DE-627)188055335X | ||
| 035 | |a (DE-599)KXP188055335X | ||
| 040 | |a DE-627 |b ger |c DE-627 |e rda | ||
| 041 | |a eng | ||
| 084 | |a 0 |2 ssgn | ||
| 100 | 1 | |e VerfasserIn |0 (DE-588)1319189156 |0 (DE-627)1880630494 |4 aut |a Bell, William L. | |
| 109 | |a Bell, William L. |a Bell, William | ||
| 245 | 1 | 0 | |a Why there is no obligation to love God |
| 264 | 1 | |c 2024 | |
| 336 | |a Text |b txt |2 rdacontent | ||
| 337 | |a Computermedien |b c |2 rdamedia | ||
| 338 | |a Online-Ressource |b cr |2 rdacarrier | ||
| 520 | |a The first and greatest commandment according to Jesus, and so the one most central to Christian practice, is the command to love God. We argue that this commandment is best interpreted in aretaic rather than deontic terms. In brief, we argue that there is no obligation to love God. While bad, failure to seek and enjoy a union of love with God is not in violation of any general moral requirement. The core argument is straightforward: relations of intimacy should not be morally imposed upon autonomous beings. We contend that such reasoning applies to human beings' relationship to God. So, even if our ultimate end is to enjoy communion with God, God has no right that human beings seek a relationship with him. If this is correct, then the command to ‘love God’ is not the sort of moral principle that can be supported by threats of hellfire or other forms of coercion. | ||
| 650 | 4 | |a Relations of intimacy | |
| 650 | 4 | |a Autonomy | |
| 650 | 4 | |a enforceable claims | |
| 650 | 4 | |a Hell | |
| 650 | 4 | |a LOVE of God | |
| 650 | 4 | |a obligations and rights | |
| 650 | 4 | |a the suberogatory | |
| 700 | 1 | |e VerfasserIn |0 (DE-588)131919141X |0 (DE-627)1880630796 |4 aut |a Renz, Graham | |
| 773 | 0 | 8 | |i Enthalten in |t Religious studies |d Cambridge [u.a.] : Cambridge Univ. Press, 1965 |g 60(2024), 1, Seite 77-88 |h Online-Ressource |w (DE-627)265785405 |w (DE-600)1466479-3 |w (DE-576)079718671 |x 1469-901X |7 nnns |
| 773 | 1 | 8 | |g volume:60 |g year:2024 |g number:1 |g pages:77-88 |
| 856 | 4 | 0 | |u https://doi.org/10.1017/S0034412523000021 |x Resolving-System |z lizenzpflichtig |3 Volltext |
| 856 | 4 | 0 | |u https://www.cambridge.org/core/journals/religious-studies/article/why-there-is-no-obligation-to-love-god/AB7DA97C3A172E7F5B8F004F124BA229 |x Verlag |z lizenzpflichtig |3 Volltext |
| 951 | |a AR | ||
| ELC | |a 1 | ||
| ITA | |a 1 |t 1 | ||
| LOK | |0 000 xxxxxcx a22 zn 4500 | ||
| LOK | |0 001 4483190601 | ||
| LOK | |0 003 DE-627 | ||
| LOK | |0 004 188055335X | ||
| LOK | |0 005 20240212155916 | ||
| LOK | |0 008 240212||||||||||||||||ger||||||| | ||
| LOK | |0 040 |a DE-Tue135 |c DE-627 |d DE-Tue135 | ||
| LOK | |0 092 |o n | ||
| LOK | |0 852 |a DE-Tue135 | ||
| LOK | |0 852 1 |9 00 | ||
| LOK | |0 935 |a ixzs |a ixzo | ||
| ORI | |a SA-MARC-ixtheoa001.raw | ||
| REL | |a 1 | ||
| SUB | |a REL | ||