As my spiritual father has often said: the best thing about God is God Himself.
God’s value is intrinsic and not based on what He does or what He can do for us. We know from Scripture that Jesus always referred to God as “Father” - except when feeling abandoned on the Cross - and even in the Lord’s Prayer instructed us to refer to Him as “Our Father.”
As a loving father, it’s abundantly clear He wants a relationship with His children. I love this aspect of who God is and that as Creator of the Universe, He doesn’t merely possess all power, but even as Almighty King, He wants a relationship with His children.
Personally, I believe these are some of the fundamental facets of Christianity. I celebrate the fact that He’s a good, wise, loving, caring father that wants a relationship with His kids. Many who have recognized these principles of who He is have come to an understanding that God isn’t transactional.
The first time I read a theological article stating that God wasn’t transactional, I thought it was a good point and tended to agree. While it might sound appealing to our grace-based senses to say that God isn’t transactional, the more I meditated on it the more I was convinced that this isn’t rooted in the Biblical narrative.
According to the Merriam-Webster dictionary, quid pro quo simply means; “something given or received for something else.” It conveys the idea of an exchange. While perhaps in the political realm this topic can be delicate and dicey, I believe the fact is that all human relationships are based upon some form of quid pro quo. Even if the myriad of exchanges are unspoken, the concept of giving and taking is present in every relationship.
For example, I’ve never heard of wedding vows asking the soon-to-be spouses to pledge their love to one another without expecting something in return. After the vows, the give and take of the relationship is both acknowledged and unspoken: I’ll do the dishes, you can do the laundry, and so forth.
Think about a childhood friend where there was probably a constant unspoken rule of “you do this, I’ll do that. I’ll do this if you’ll eventually do that”. We’re usually not going to start a conversation that way and if constantly sharing your demands were to be the basis of your conversations, that’s probably a sign of an unhealthy, immature relationship. That’s why a majority of the communications in our closest relationships don’t frequently use that type of language.
Whether it’s a parent telling Little Johnny that if he cleans his room he can play video games, or a government’s relationship to its citizens where the government expects cooperation from its citizens while those citizens pay taxes in expectation of paved roads etc.
From something so fundamental as a father-to-child relationship to one’s relationship with his own government, this give-and-take dynamic is clear, and we can see the concept of exchange woven into the fabric of every relationship.
On one hand I think the reason why Christians may oppose this concept on a surface-level theologically is because it feels that it goes against the grain of grace. As good Evangelicals we recognize we’re not saved by works, instead, we’re saved by grace through faith. And in our attempts to keep the grace of God at the forefront, we tend to flee from anything that could be perceived as trying to earn something from God.
In next month’s installment, we’ll discuss the spiritual tension that is present within our union with Father God. For while His love is unconditional, His friendship is not.