Is it possible for conflict to make love more compelling?

Conflicts that control or weaken your ability to enjoy life are conflicts that cut off your life-supply of love. Love is the substance of your life and it must control conflicts in order to enable you to grow. If the love within you is not strong enough to do this, the conflicts you face will destroy and choke the theory you have of love.

For love to be real, it must fulfill two requirements, 1) it must not be from you and 2) it must be something that is practiced, not merely felt. Does this seem a little rough, a little less appealing than the love you feel is more natural? If so, than might I suggest that it’s possible that the love you hold to is more about you than it is about extending yourself for the interest of others?

That may sound a bit harsh, but if love is of God (as it says in 1 John 4) than truly you cannot attest to your possession of it if we are not “of God” yourself. Therefore, you do not look to yourself to conjure up love; you merely offer yourself to God that He might transform you into a tangible expression of the love He gives you.

God’s love teaches that all conflicts come from us–us and our neighbors–and the resolution of all conflict comes from God. Because we do not have to be the ones to create a way to fix all the situations we’re in, we learn to trust God and glorify Him in our trials.

Yes, how lovely our Savior looks in these things as He embraces us in the cares that have come because of our sin and the consequences of our original rebellion! He who should have stayed far away from us, now not only comes near, but shares with us in our mistakes, that He might make them testimonies to His success at Calvary: How He has covered all our sin and made us acceptable before God not on our merits, but on His.

If God’s love can so masterfully convert this conflict into something that can make us love Him, can He not use all the daily conflicts we face now to make us appreciate that love more and more?

Wikipedia: His political essay Utopia speculates about life under an ideal government.

Morality is empty without the Man who makes it

Without Jesus Christ, the perfection of righteousness, struggling for morality is a sham. It is a failed attempt at being good. Because, the fact is, if Jesus Christ is not central to what we understand of morality, we have one of two problems:

1) We believe that there is no God. Should this be the case then there is no reason for us to practice morality. He is the one we are moral for; He is the reason why we desire right living.

2) We believe there is a God who has high center, but He is in no way connected with Jesus Christ–we certainly do not think that He is Jesus Christ. In this case, we must lose our hope of being moral, of being pleasing to God because if we are not accepted on the merits of Jesus Christ, we have no merits at all by which we may be accepted.

Both problems given above can be represented here with a single inequality:

man + no Jesus Christ + work//does not equal//the rewards of God awarded to man

Instead, we must substitute God into the first side of our equation and remove the factors we have named “no Jesus Christ” and “work” to resolve the inconsistencies on the right side of our equation:

man + no Jesus Christ + work = man + God – no God – work      >

Now our changes can be substituted into the original equation:

man + Jesus Christ = the rewards of God awarded to man

And we have a perfect equation–both sides are consistent with the whole.


Wikipedia: God is the English name given to a singular being in theistic and deistic religions who is either the sole deity in monotheism, or a single deity in polytheism.