I agree, but I don't think it's a strict correlation. The extent to which you rise though loving God is not directly proportional to the depth to which you have sunk.
It can be like the father of the prodigal son, but in all cases Godly type Loves initially comes from accepting God’s Love. The young son did not return home because he “Loved” the father, a more “loving” act in the young son’s thinking, might have been to not bother the father further with an undeserved request.
When you correctly accept forgiveness of an unbelievable huge debt you have an unbelievable huge Love (Godly type Love).
Depends how you define Christians. As Jesus said, if you do an act of kindness to the least of people you do it to Him. This means that loving the hungry (in a real way by actually giving them food rather than sermons) is the same as loving Jesus which, to me, is the only meaningful definition of a Christian.
A person anywhere in the world and in any environment can come to the conclusion they cannot personally lift this burden in their conscience, by all the methods they have tried. They can believe and turn to a benevolent Creator and seek His help which God will provide and they can realize. They will thus obtain a true Godly type Love for the Creator and also His creation.
This Godly type Love can motivate them to help others, but what if they are doing good stuff because they think they will get good stuff in this life and use that as a motivation?
“Christian” was a descriptive term and not a title.
Love grows with use, but initially it comes from “…he that is forgiven much Loves much…” Luke 7. Accepting God’s Love first.
I am not saying you cannot learn about this Love from CS Lewis book on Love, seeing others, having others Love on you, reading scripture and so on. The problem is truly accepting this Love as pure undeserved charity. People in general want to be “loved” for the way others perceive them to be and not in spite of the way they really are, which is very humbling, since anyone can be “Loved” in spite of the way they are.
True, once we initially humbly accept Godly type Love in the form of forgiveness it grows with use, or can slowly wither away from lack of use.
We also grow in the knowledge of how great our sins were and how much we have been forgiven of.
But is love for others different than love for God? Mother Theresa said that when she was feeding the starving she felt that she was feeding Jesus who that person was made in the image of, whether they were Christian or not.
Loving others out of our Love for God is Godly type Love, so the Mother Theresa type “love” of loving someone because they are in the image of God is a conditional type love and not an unconditional type Love (Loving someone in spite of who they are [or think them to be]). Godly type Love has nothing to do with the person you are Loving being in God’s image, but you Love, because it pleases God.
No, but it is a parable with all the limitations that entails. God the Father has much more resources and time at His disposal than the prodigal's father had.
Christ does the best job that could be done in recording His parables, not words could be added or removed to express the spiritual meaning better.
One thing, I think you are saying or seem to be saying is: “Time will help us make the right choice” and God with more time and “resources” can further help us in making the right choice, so eventually everyone will make the right choice, but is that true? (This is a heavy lengthy question).
1. Is a lack of “knowledge” the sinner’s problem, so given enough “knowledge” and time to think about it, everyone will humbly accept pure undeserving charity as pure charity? (Do you see that happening in our world?)
2. Does “knowledge”: puff a person up, make them even more self-reliant, feed their ego and pride, and turn them away from strengthening their trust/faith?
3. Do you see, as I have seem, people who have repeatedly refused God’s Love/charity growing a hard heart. The Bible repeatedly talks about our hearts becoming harden over time?
4. From my understanding: no one will go to hell (eventual annihilation) for lack of knowledge (that would make it God’s fault), but people go to hell for repeatedly refusing God’s charity to the point they would never accept God’s charity.
5. If the prodigal son, in the pigsty, had, for “his own good reason”, decided to stay and slowly starve to death in the pigsty, what more could have been done to such a hard heart, to further help the young son make the free will choice to turn to his father
and it still being a free will choice on his part (a choice with other “likely” alternatives)?
6. Do you realize there are just somethings God cannot do? (This is the reason humans spend time on earth.)
Unfortunately, this messed up world is the very best place (really the only place) with: human death being a limitation, for willing individuals to fulfill their objective. The fact that man has only a limited lifespan is a help. Sin has perceived pleasure for a season at least, so the desire to sin is strong, but sin has purpose for the nonbelieving sinner (now needing forgiveness Luke 7), the problem is if time is not a limiting factor man will put off seeking forgiveness, and continue to pursue the pleasures of sin, hardening the person’s heart. Old people, facing death in the near future, do not automatically, change their ways and become Christians, they become set (hardened) in their ways.
I would say the opposite because I think the fear of hell is a man-made, Dante like concept, not a biblical one. I also don't categorise Christians and non-Christians in the way you do because of the parable of the sheep and the goats and Jesus's emphasis on love for others rather than declaring assent towards a set of intellectual beliefs.
Wow, another huge topic, so briefly:
I do
not believe from what I know about God: “People who die without the opportunity to truly be able to accept or reject God’s Love go to hell.” I believe they would go to heaven, yet lacking Godly type love and only having a very wonderful, child for wonderful Parent type Love. Those of us who have Godly type Love, might have to be constantly with those without Godly type love, to protect and preserve them for eternity, since there is no way for them to obtain Godly type Love after leaving earth.
The “fear” of hell is not “bad” for the nonbelieving sinner, who comes to the realization the Christian God does exist and thus hell must exist. Hell exists to help some willing people make the choice
sooner than later (and thus avoid a harder choice) to humbly accept God’s help/charity/forgiveness. The people who go to hell (eventual annihilation) are not going there to be helped or because of God’s vengeance, but to help choosers (the willing nonbeliever, which I was one). Think about this: If there was no hell, why not sit on the decision to accept God charity (become unselfish), and just continue to pursue the perceived pleasures of sin for a while longer, be selfish (where is no down side, except???).
The question is: do you want to be unselfishly Loved not because of who you are, but because the Lover is an unselfish being Loving everyone, and secondly become like this unselfish Lover and Love others unselfishly yourself?
Answering the question with an acceptance, does not depend on gaining greater knowledge although some knowledge is needed, but on what you personally want. Again, most people want to be “loved” for how they want people to perceive them to be.
That's a good an explanation of universalism as I've ever heard!
No, it is not. Soldiers want to hang in there, be good soldiers, hate their enemy to the point of never willing to accept pure undeserved charity from their enemy, if that was even possible. Most surrender in earthly armies because their leader orders them to surrender, but that is not the case with satan, since he will never order you to surrender, it has to be your choice.
