# the power of love versus the power of hate



## Saucy (Apr 16, 2004)

If all the love in the world and all the hate in the world could be combined together into a mortal form fighting each other to diminish one or the other the world wich would win?


----------



## Arthur_Vandelay (Apr 16, 2004)

I don't know where to begin in addressing that question. Wouldn't "Love" turn the other cheek, or something?

In which case, what would "winning" entail?


----------



## Mrs. Maggott (Apr 16, 2004)

There is no power in the universe or indeed, in infinity itself that is greater than love. God Himself _is_ Love and created all things in, through and by that love. 

Love grows and enlarges as it is bestowed so that it becomes a fountain of blessing to all whom encounter it. Love can overcome hate, but hate cannot overcome love - that, by the way, is what the film "The Passion of the Christ" is all about: love conquering hate.

Hate, on the other hand, destroys its object, not its subject. It destroys the hater, not the hated. Hate is narrow and self-absorbed. Eventually, it withers all who partake of it. Hate is weak while love is strong. Hatred embitters while love pacifies; hate consumes while love bestows; hate diminishes while love elevates. There can be love without hate, but the very emotion of hate is predicated upon the existence of love.


----------



## Saucy (Apr 16, 2004)

well i voted hate, becaus ethere seems to be more hate in the world then love.

and the hate seems to be so much mor epowerful in hurting that of love...


----------



## Ireth Telrúnya (Apr 17, 2004)

If you think of these concepts only in our earthen realm, then hatred would have a good chance to win, but if you think further, you see that love is by nature much more powerful than hate. I think I mean love in its divine sense.
It may be that some people have that kind of love, yet no one can have love that Jesus showed on the cross...


----------



## Mrs. Maggott (Apr 17, 2004)

powersauce21 said:


> well i voted hate, becaus ethere seems to be more hate in the world then love.
> 
> and the hate seems to be so much mor epowerful in hurting that of love...


Hate is very painful for both the subject and the object - but that doesn't equate to power. It's the difference between noise and music. Noise can be VERY loud - overwhelming. But it is soon forgotten. Music, on the other hand, is carried in the mind and is not easily dismissed. Heck, haven't we all had that bit where some silly tune gets in your head and you go around singing it all day even when you don't like it? On the other hand, what "noise" can you bring to mind unless you actually duplicate it (like dropping a bunch of pots down a cement staircase)?

Now, if you had asked in your survey, which is more _prevelant_ on earth - love or hate - then the answer might well have had to be different. But if you are speaking of fundamental power, one person filled with love can overcome a million consumed by hate. Christ has already done it.


----------



## Celebthôl (Apr 17, 2004)

This question in itself is impossible, as without love there would be no hate, and vise versa. However hate is much more potant than love, and can be felt anywhere for anyone, very easily, in contrast love must be earned in a way, of course you can "like" a person easily, and unless its your child, you would not love that person the minute you met them. None-the-less, love is a much more powerful emotion that hate.


----------



## Manveru (Apr 17, 2004)

let me see... i tried to vote for the third option, but (alas?) i don't know you that much, powersauce21 

words of Arthur_Vandelay seem true... and that's IMHO what's all about: love doesn't fight off anything, it just is...


----------



## Mrs. Maggott (Apr 17, 2004)

Celebthôl said:


> This question in itself is impossible, as without love there would be no hate, and vise versa. However hate is much more potant than love, and can be felt anywhere for anyone, very easily, in contrast love must be earned in a way, of course you can "like" a person easily, and unless its your child, you would not love that person the minute you met them. None-the-less, love is a much more powerful emotion that hate.


As far as "earning" love is concerned, that depends. There are three "types" of "love". One is "philos" or "brotherly" love; one is "eros" or "sexual" love (NOT lust) and the third - and greatest - is "agape" which means "disinterested" and/or "Godly" love. While one may have to "earn" the first two, the third is simply "bestowed" by the lover upon whomever he or she wishes to bestow it. No "worthiness" is necessary. Indeed, it is frequently bestowed upon the most _un_worthy. 

In a film about the Vatican during the last years of WWII, Gregory Peck plays and American priest who works to save downed allied fliers and smuggle them to safety while Christopher Plummer plays his Nazi opponent who does all in his power not only to catch the fliers, but the priest as well. In the end, Plummer comes to Peck and asks if he can smuggle the Nazi officer's family out of Rome to protect them from the coming campaign. The priest does so. After the war, the officer is imprisoned as a war criminal, but although his wife and family never bother to contact him again - even though they are safe - the priest goes weekly to see his old nemesis. In the end, the old former Nazi converts to Catholicism and becomes a believer, influenced by the "disinterested" love (agape) shown to him by the priest whom he tried to destroy. This is a true story. Love does indeed conquer all.


----------



## Snaga (Apr 17, 2004)

In order to maintain balance in the universe, everytime you love someone, somebody else must be hating someone else equally passionately.


----------



## Mrs. Maggott (Apr 17, 2004)

Snaga said:


> In order to maintain balance in the universe, everytime you love someone, somebody else must be hating someone else equally passionately.


I fear you are attributing to emotion and will things that more properly belong to the laws of physics. There is neither the need nor the possibility for an "equal" amount of love and hate in the universe. To begin with, that would be impossible since God - who is the personification of Love - is all powerful; there is nothing in creation that can begin to come close to equalling His power. Ergo, even Satan - the personification, if you will, of hate - is a mere creature, a being created by God. If there were nothing else in all of creation but these two entities, the comparison between the two would be akin a supernova vs. a firefly - and that's erring on the side of Satan! 

Hate (like death) is a consequence of man's fall from grace. When the time comes that our proper relationship to God is finally established for good and all - after the Second Coming - hate will cease to exist. It has no part of God and therefore should have no part of man. Indeed, even in this life, some people have achieved that sublime state; and some of them are called saints.


----------



## Saucy (Apr 17, 2004)

Snaga said:


> In order to maintain balance in the universe, everytime you love someone, somebody else must be hating someone else equally passionately.




i like that theory
 


but i still worry that even i fthey are equal hate seems to overpower love, its more boasterous, kinda like that person who enjoys all the attention.


----------



## Snaga (May 2, 2004)

Mrs. Maggott said:


> I fear you are attributing to emotion and will things that more properly belong to the laws of physics. There is neither the need nor the possibility for an "equal" amount of love and hate in the universe. To begin with, that would be impossible since God - who is the personification of Love - is all powerful; there is nothing in creation that can begin to come close to equalling His power. Ergo, even Satan - the personification, if you will, of hate - is a mere creature, a being created by God. If there were nothing else in all of creation but these two entities, the comparison between the two would be akin a supernova vs. a firefly - and that's erring on the side of Satan!
> 
> Hate (like death) is a consequence of man's fall from grace. When the time comes that our proper relationship to God is finally established for good and all - after the Second Coming - hate will cease to exist. It has no part of God and therefore should have no part of man. Indeed, even in this life, some people have achieved that sublime state; and some of them are called saints.


Hehe not really. That was just a throwaway Star Wars-ism! On the other hand there's not much empirical evidence for the supernova vs firefly ratio of love and hate, at least as apparent amongst people.


----------



## Mrs. Maggott (May 2, 2004)

Snaga said:


> Hehe not really. That was just a throwaway Star Wars-ism! On the other hand there's not much empirical evidence for the supernova vs firefly ratio of love and hate, at least as apparent amongst people.


You are speaking here of "perceptions" and that is not necessarily akin to reality. If it's foggy, I can only see a few feet around me, but that doesn't mean that reality has changed - only my _perception_ of it. If I am underwater, as soon as I am down just a few feet, all the colors of what I see change and everything is blue or at least shades of that color. But the colors are still there - only my _perception_ has changed by virtue of the physics of light. We live in a world of which _Satan_ not God is the Prince. Hence, like fog or water, we are bathed in his hatred of God and of us. The fact that we can "see" any love at all is proof of the strength of love itself. When all of that evil is swept away, like the strength of the sun above the atmosphere, the power of love will become evident.


----------



## Snaga (May 2, 2004)

Thanks. That clears that one up.

I don't suppose there's any chance you could be mistaken?


----------



## Mrs. Maggott (May 2, 2004)

Snaga said:


> Thanks. That clears that one up.
> 
> I don't suppose there's any chance you could be mistaken?


Of course _I_ "could be mistaken", but it isn't "I" who have defined God as Love; _He_ did - and He _cannot_ be "mistaken". He has also defined Himself - and is defined in the Church - as omnipotent, omniescent, omnipresent and "all good". Of course, if one doesn't "believe", than none of this matters very much, does it? Again, it is a matter of perception - as I said in the beginning.


----------



## Snaga (May 3, 2004)

I shouldn't tease you, Mrs M. Forgive me: it is one of my many flaws.

I would say that love and hate matter a great deal regardless of one's conception of divinity. I personally do not hold any belief that there will be any second coming to sweep away hatred and evil. I would rather people did their bit to get rid of it now, rather than take a fatalistic stance on such things.

I don't think that because we can percieve love it means it is strong: it merely demonstrates its existence. Undoubtedly, that is a good and encouraging thing. But love that is abstract and external to people (ie exists as a divine being) is impossible to quantify (by definition, I would say), and so my statements were merely about how much love and hate there is in human hearts. I take encouragement from the fact that love seems instinctual from birth amongst people, whereas hatred has to be taught. So I am in fact an optimist, and I believe we can find a way to live with less hatred involved. Its going to take quite a lot of trying, but then the dinosaurs ruled the planet for millions of years, and we've only been going for thousands.


----------



## Mrs. Maggott (May 3, 2004)

Fear not, fair Snaga, I shall survive even this!  

However, as for "fatalistic", I assure you that Christians are not permitted to shake their heads and await the establishment of God's Kingdom! That is why we are called the Church Militant; we're supposed to be _doing something_ and not sitting around on our pews waiting for God to set things right. The following story is illustrative of the subject:

Behold and there was a godly man named George who lived in a lovely river valley. A time came when there were several weeks of rain and the river rose and overflowed its banks, flooding the valley and George took refuge on the second floor of his home. And lo, a boat came by with several of George's neighbors who called to him, "George, the river is rising and they are afraid that the dam might break! Come with us to safety!" But George replied, "Fear not, my friends! I trust in God and He will deliver me!" 

Still the rain fell and the river rose and George climbed up onto his roof for safety. And lo, _another_ boat with more neighbors came past and they called to George, "George, the river is rising and they are afraid that the dam might break! Come with us to safety!" But George replied, "Fear not, my friends! I trust in God and He will deliver me!" 

And still the rain fell and the river rose and as George watched from his almost inundated roof, a rescue helicopter flew over and the men called to him, "Sir! This is the River Police! The dam is breaking! We will let down a rope ladder to you and take you to safety!" But once again George replied, "Fear not, good folk! I trust in God and He will deliver me!" And the dam burst - _and George was drowned_.

Upon reaching heaven, George was in a right state. Needless to say, he was _very_ angry with God and when he appeared before The Throne, he could not contain himself. "Lord!" he complained, "I trusted in You and You failed to deliver me!!" The Lord looked down sadly and said, "My son, _"I sent you two boats and a helicopter!"_ 

Thus it is that while we are to trust in God, it is wise not to predetermine what method His help might assume! God _did_ help George, but George was looking for fiery chariots, not prosaic boats and plebian helicopters!


----------



## Snaga (May 3, 2004)

Please! Spare me your allegories, or I may be sick!

I've heard that story before. I always considered its real meaning was that being blessed with faith is not the same as being blessed with intelligence!


----------



## Mrs. Maggott (May 3, 2004)

Snaga said:


> Please! Spare me your allegories, or I may be sick!
> 
> I've heard that story before. I always considered its real meaning was that being blessed with faith is not the same as being blessed with intelligence!


I like your smilies. In fact, the last one led me to think that I could speak with you. But obviously since, as a Christian I do not wish to make you "sick", I shall forbear any future discussion for both our sakes.


----------



## Persephone (May 3, 2004)

*errm!* Going back to the topic at hand...

Hate and love come from the same source - in medical terms it is called the Limbic System (don't know if I spelled that correctly), in "other" terms it comes from the heart. There is not question that Love is the more powerful of the two but hate can be powerful as well. There is even a study being done as to whether hate can be passed on genetically. Love is definitely passed on genetically - like if the father or mother has this love for music, eventually one or all of their children will inherit this aspect. A study is now being done to establish the fact that it is the same thing with hatred. And if after this study this fact is proven to be true - be careful who or what you hate, you will pass them on to your children.

I believe that given all examples history has, one thing has been proven, that both these emotions played a great part in molding human civilization - we are what we are now because someone before us displayed a great amount of one or both. For our sakes let us hope that the future will be molded by someone who has more love in him than hate.


----------



## Mrs. Maggott (May 4, 2004)

If one is speaking about biology and physiology, that's one thing. If one is speaking philosophically, theologically, ethically and cosmically, that is another matter altogether. Certainly, areas of the brain "create" sensations, feelings etc. and if one is going to ask which "emotion" love or hate is more powerful with regard to our physiological make up, then it would depend upon the _degree_ (strength) of the emotion as well as the individual body chemistry of the person under discussion. Some people seem to be very "hot-wired" emotionally while others are much less prone to the ordinary _angst_ suffered by their fellow men - and I don't mean here people who are able to _hide_ their emotions, but people who actually don't have a large emotional range. 

Furthermore, we are also familiar with the belief that love and hate are not necessarily mutually exclusive. The people whom one most loves are frequently the people whom one most hates! After all, it is hard to work up a lot of emotion about someone who means nothing.

But again, if we are speaking merely of human physiology, then the two emotions would be largely dependent upon the individual's environment. Did he or she grow up in a loving family - or not. Was life relatively pleasant - or not. Is that individual surrounded by "love" or by apathy, indifference or even anger and hate? These would be the factors - together with the person's "cerebral wiring" - which would determine the relative strength of the two emotions.

However, if one is speaking cosmically (as I was), then there can be no doubt of the triumph of love.


----------



## Snaga (May 4, 2004)

Mrs. Maggott said:


> I like your smilies. In fact, the last one led me to think that I could speak with you. But obviously since, as a Christian I do not wish to make you "sick", I shall forbear any future discussion for both our sakes.


You can talk to me! But if you do so in allegories I reserve the right to complain. I find them unconvincing or long-winded. Which is to say, if I agree with the point being made, I will agree with it when it is said succinctly and the story is unnecessary. But if I do not agree, a made up story is not good evidence.

However, a notion of divinity that is typified by people doing good in their own way is more believable to me than fiery chariots and other fanciful notions. So in that sense, I accept something from your story.

Returning to loving Gods and second comings... I accept what you say about fatalism, . This is putting how I feel about it a little more clearly: I find that some who believe in these ideas, having assured themselves that they are going to be welcomed with open arms whenever they believe judgement day to be, then can be very rejecting of those who they believe will not. Although they would never admit to "hate", they are evidently full of its milder forms: scorn, prejudice, anger... I've seen how one version of the belief in a loving God has done this recently, and its very unpleasant. I suspect these forms are rather more common than overpowering hatred.

I think it rather better to be a little more humble about ones own worth, and rather more positive about finding it in others. Some Christians once told me I had been "saved". That was great.... Game Over! When I thought about it, I decided they had no idea whether I was saved or not saved, and it was a bad presumption and I better just try to do what little I could to make the world better. I know I don't stick very assiduously to that task, as no doubt most people reading this can verify.


----------



## greypilgrim (Jul 3, 2004)

Love/Hate are emotions that drive people. If you really love someone you'd do almost anything for that person...except die for them. If you really hate someone you can't kill them... or you go to prison. So I think overall, hate would win, because you go out and kill someone, not give them a big hug or whatever.


----------

