Do you ever find a train of thought results in a “WTF moment”? This one just stopped my locomotive dead in its tracks – and made “love is always the answer, now what’s your question” absolutely true.
If we believe in original sin defining man as a sinner, we have to believe in the absence of free will. If original sin defines me as a sinner to be saved I have to believe in an obligation to sin. If I believe I have no free will in this then no matter how much I love and love and love I will sin and sin and sin.
So I will never achieve unconditional love. Because unconditional love is defined by free will in everything and always. So I must believe that God is unconditional love and I never will be (until I meet my Maker).
God is unconditional love because He cannot sin. Why would He wish His creations to be unable to love other than “conditionally”? Because the greatest command is to love unconditionally. And if the “condition of” original sin is removed (as an obligation of consequence for (wo)man today and tomorrow) unconditional love is possible.
Or to put it another way …
Every “Follower” must achieve unconditional love or else they are not a Follower they are a Critic.
(which sounds a lot like “cleric” for some reason).
And suffering sin is not an obligation of love – suffering sin is the conditional love as a consequence of choice of a Critic.
And that is not being a Follower at all.
One of my unresolved discomforts with the “tradition of Christianity” has always been “Original Sin” and “The Fall”.
An unfairness that is not of love. A consequence I must suffer and correct (even though being saved does not “correct” my “sinning”).
The God Soft Hands Jesus I have come to know does not operate that way. The GSHJ who lives within has no need of that. Because need is condition and condition is not unconditional and GSHJ in unconditional in loving me.
So just why would GSHJ engineer anything that prevents me from unconditional love here and now in my own lifetime? Is that not a “suppression” or “glass ceiling” on my loving? And what purpose might that serve to a God of unconditional love?
Or might that serve (wo)man rather than God?
Might that be a religious “get-out-of-jail-free” card at play (again)?
Because the more I come to know GSHJ – the less reason I find to limit love – other than as taught in the tradition and institution of church and religion.
And that raises another discomfort.