Is Unconditional Love Biblical? Part 2

     Preface: if you haven't, I highly advise reading my first article on unconditional love before reading this one.

     I write this next entry for the blog after having some good feedback from the first one. Keep in mind, I am still processing the question, "Is unconditional love biblical?" What I am about to write should NOT be read as me arguing for my personal conviction in an attempt to persuade others, but simply my attempt at verbalizing an internal debate I've been having with myself.

     I am NOT convinced that what I understand of "conditional love" is biblical, either. I'm simply testing the idea that the two terms "unconditional" and "conditional" are two extremes in a possibly false paradigm of how we define and interpret "love" within the bible.

     As a reminder of what I wrote in my last post, unconditional love was a term I used as a synonym for "agape" and as a way to distinguish God's love. For me, it meant that God bestows His love towards us without any preconditions from us. He continues to love us regardless of how we love Him.

     In this line of thinking, I reasoned that God's love for mankind is unconditional. Regardless of the condition mankind is in, God still loves him. However, there are conditions people must obey before they can fully receive God's love. God's love is unconditionally extended to us through Jesus Christ, but it is received on the condition of our obedience.

     Now, let's look at Romans 5:8."But God commendeth his love toward us, in that, while we were yet sinners, Christ died for us." (KJV) This continues to be one of my favorite verses. Not too long ago, this was the first verse that came to mind to support unconditional love. This was my ace.

     But context is king when studying the scriptures. Romans 5:8 comes at the end of an argument of contrast. The full argument reads, "Very rarely will anyone die for a righteous person, though for a good person someone might possibly die. But God demonstrates his own love for us in this: while we were still sinners, Christ died for us." (NIV). This seemed like a very apparent example of unconditional love to me.

     I mean, when I add Romans 5:6 as the point Paul was making with the above argument... surely, unconditional love is true. "For when we were yet without strength, in due time Christ died for the ungodly." (KJV) We were powerless. We didn't do anything to bring Jesus into the world. Rare are the people who might give up their lives for a righteous man. Rarer still are those who would die for a good man! Men might die for another on the condition that the other has some measure of goodness, but God sent His Son unconditionally to die for us. Right?

     Is unconditional love really an accurate description of what's laid out here? God bestowed His love towards us without any preconditions from us?

     If that's true, what am I supposed to do with God's wrath being mentioned in Romans 5:9? "... being now justified by his blood, we shall be saved from wrath through him." 

     I've caught myself in a dilemma, thinking about this. On one hand, I believe God's wrath is still an expression of His love. On the other hand, I thought God loves us unconditionally. Yet, He does not have unconditional wrath against us.
   
     As I looked at Romans 5:8 closer, Paul's point seems to be that there indeed were conditions on our part for why God sent His Son. We sinned. We were powerless. That's what makes his argument of contrast so powerful! Men may sometimes show the great love of self-sacrifice for another, on the condition that the other has some measure of goodness. But God shows forth His great love of self-sacrifice on the condition that we were sinners. God's love is so great, it's even extended on terms that were in opposition to Him.

     What were those terms we laid out for Him that were in opposition to Him? Oh, yeah... sinning against Him to the point of brutally nailing Jesus to a cross and mocking Him as He slowly died of asphyxiation.

     Even then, God met our terms with His love. But, by those same terms, we've also earned for ourselves His wrath.

     The dilemma I mentioned earlier about God's wrath still being an expression of His love no longer seems as strong now.

     If God's love is influenced by conditions, what might those terms be whereby I gain His love? I realized, they were inherent, already at work within me. He loves me because I am a part of His creation. He loves me because I am made in His image. He loves me because I am my own unique soul. He loves me because He has a plan for me. He loves me because He sees my unused and unrealized potential. Really, I could incorporate the endless list of conditions for why God loves me into a simple one. He made me.

     God loves me because He made me.

     He made me with the freedom to sin.

     Therefore, God loves me even when I sin.

     God loves me, because even when I was lost to him, enraptured by my own sin and spiritually-oblivious to Him, He sent Jesus to take that state of being away for me.

     That's the context of Romans 5:8.

     If God lays out the conditions for me to be lovable, then wouldn't that also mean He lays out the conditions for me to be condemned? That seems to fit pretty well with both the contexts of Romans 5:8 and John 3:16.

     I appreciate Romans 5:8 on a much deeper level now. There were Judaizers in Paul's day that would say we have to earn Jesus by means of our own merit. Paul doesn't dismiss this claim by introducing a proposition of unconditional love. He actually cuts the legs out from under them with their own reasoning. We already have God's love conditionally, even on the condition of our sinfulness.

     If what I'm seeing is indeed Paul's argument, rather than unconditional love, then what he says later in Romans 6:1 makes more sense as well. "What shall we say then? Shall we continue in sin, that grace may abound?" He has to clarify for His audience, lest they walk away thinking, "I can sin more, so God will show me more love!" No, no, Paul clarifies. Since you have God's love by means of your sinfulness, then use your sinfulness as a reason to come to God on His terms. Have Him take away your sins through union with Jesus's death, burial, and resurrection. (Rom. 6:2-7). Otherwise, you're going to have God's wrath by means of your sinfulness, and you're still gonna have to answer to Jesus.

     Romans 6:1-7 takes on a whole new irony with this perspective. The very same condition we gave God to love us is the same condition He gave us to love Him.

     However, let's think about Romans 5:8 as if Paul is saying God's love is unconditional. If God loves me without any regard to my condition, then that actually confuses why He pours so much regard into my sinful condition by sending Jesus. And it also confuses why I want to walk in His love by changing my condition (Romans 6). It also confuses why He's intent on pouring out His wrath through Jesus someday.

     The very term "unconditional love" seems self-contradictory. If love is having regard for another, then I cannot really love someone by disregarding the condition they're in. "Greater love hath no man than this, that a man lay down his life for his friends." (John 15:13, KJV) I can't show greater love to my friend by giving up my life for him, until I first judge that he's in danger.

     God doesn't love unconditionally, with no regard to my condition.

     God is love. Because he loves me, He has total regard for my condition. This train of thought seems more in alignment with 1 John 4:7-21 and Philippians 2:1-11.

     When I first met our dog, Skye, she was the trembling, ugly runt of the litter. There were a dozen other puppies in what some might consider better condition than Skye. These other puppies were cute, playful, and bouncing around joyfully like typical puppies do. But I fell in love with that little, scrawny, trembling, twig in the corner, growling at everything around her. Why? Because I loved what I saw.

      And because I loved her, she filled out, gained confidence under my training, and became playful with other dogs. And you know what? I still love Skye, because she's a dog. I fell in love on the condition of what I saw. I still love on the condition of what I see. And, I will continue to love on the condition that I can no longer see her, when she dies. She's my dog.

     If that's how my love worked for a dog, how much more so does God love me!

     I'm tying a knot on this subject for now. As always, thank you for reading. I appreciate any feedback as I continue to unpack my thoughts.

     Pressing forward... Nathaniel