Does God's Love serve Power, or Power serve Love?

Many of us who believe in God would list a similar set of attributes of what make God an Ultimate Reality worthy of the title "God". We may say God is eternal, non-material, all powerful, all knowing, and all good. God stands apart from all other beings as the Source of Being itself, the Creator of all things that are not Godself. All good and true. But is it possible for two people to hold all these views in common, and yet have diametrically opposed views of how God acts, and why God treats us the way God does? 

Yes. How we order and prioritize God's attributes can result in a radically different vision of God. We don't tend to talk about this much, and we assume that all Christians or all Theists worship the same God. But could it be the case that, actually, we worship totally different images of the same God? Nothing brings out this divide better than the question: Does God's Love serve Power, or Power serve Love?

Theology is rarely just a collection of abstract facts about the divine; it is more often a reflection of the "Overstory" through which we view the world. While God exists as the self-sufficient Ground of Being, our mental images of God are frequently colored by our own internal landscapes—our hopes for justice, our fears of abandonment, our resentments toward others, or our longings for restoration. At the heart of many theological divides is a fundamental question of hierarchy: Which divine attribute is the "source code" for all others? Specifically, is Divine Love a function of Divine Power, or is Divine Power a function of Divine Love?

The Monarchy of Power: Sovereignty and Exclusion

In many traditional "Exclusionary" models of Christianity, Divine Power—often framed as "Sovereignty"—is the primary lens through which God is understood. In this framework, God is viewed as a perfectly sovereign monarch whose will is the ultimate standard of reality. Here, Love is not an essential definition of God’s nature that constrains His actions, but rather a choice that His power makes.

This perspective, deeply rooted in the later writings of St. Augustine and the Reformed tradition of John Calvin, suggests that God is justified in acting however He chooses because of His absolute authority. Augustine’s reaction to the "Fall of Humanity" led to the concept of the massa damnata—the idea that all humans are born into a state of corruption and justly deserve condemnation. In this view, God’s "Love" is expressed only toward those whom He has "elected" to save.

This birthed the intense historical debates over predestination, which all share a common assumption: It is taken for granted that God has elected to love some and hate others, to welcome some into eternal bliss and to throw others into unending torment. But on what basis does God exercise this power?

• Single Predestination: The view that God graciously chooses some for salvation (the elect) while simply "passing over" the rest, leaving them to their natural, sinful end.

• Double Predestination: The more logically rigorous Reformed view that God actively decrees some for heaven and others for hell to display both His mercy and His justice.

In this map, Hell is understood as retributive—a place of eternal, conscious punishment for the unloved or the non-elect, serving to satisfy an infinite debt. As the philosopher Keith Ward notes, if we prioritize power over love, we risk creating a "monstrous" image of God where Divine goodness has different standards for different people.

The Sovereignty of Love: Restoration and Correction

Alternatively, an "Inclusive" theological map begins with the Johannine declaration that "God is Love" (1 John 4:8). In this model, every other attribute—including power, justice, and wrath—must be a function of that essential Love. Power is not the ability to do "whatever one wants," but the creative energy of the Spirit used to actualize the Good, the True, and the Beautiful in all beings.

This shift in priority completely redefines the nature of punishment and judgment. If God is like a "Loving Parent" or a "Master Physician," then Divine wrath is never retributive (aimed at getting even) but always restorative (aimed at healing). As the prophet Ezekiel records, God takes "no pleasure in the death of the wicked, but that the wicked turn from their ways and live" (Ezekiel 33:11).

This leads to the ancient tradition of Apokatastasis—the "final restoration of all things". Held by early church fathers like Origen and Gregory of Nyssa, this view argues that God’s Love is ultimately irresistible. Because God is the "Source" from whom all things come, He is also the "End" to whom all things must return.

• Gehenna as a Tool: In this framework, even the biblical concept of Hell (Gehenna) is reframed. Rather than a "dumpster" for the unloved, it is seen as a "refining fire" or a "final, intense process of purification".

• Corrective Discipline: The Greek word often translated as "punishment" (kolasis) was originally an agricultural term for pruning a tree to help it bear more fruit. Thus, judgment is a tool of Love used to burn away the "chaff" of our false selves to restore the Imago Dei (Image of God) within.

The Christward Trajectory

Ultimately, we judge our theological maps by whether they lead to a life of thriving. An inclusive vision recognizes that the work of reconciliation God does in Christ is "unlimited and unstoppable". As the Apostle Paul writes, "For as in Adam all die, so in Christ all will be made alive" (1 Corinthians 15:22), and Jesus Himself promised that when He was lifted up, He would "draw all people" to Himself (John 12:32).

For a more detailed exploration of these ideas in my book Theology for Thriving, please consult the following:

• Unit 1.1: On how different "Overstories" (Exclusionary vs. Inclusive) shape our reality.

• Unit 2.5: Regarding the nature of Agape as the essential character of the Trinity.

• Unit 7.2 & 7.3: For the distinction between retributive punishment and restorative discipline.

• Unit 7.5: On the historical and scriptural basis for Apokatastasis.