I attempted to conceptualize an analogy to exemplify the imprudence of this mindset. Recalling my interactions with the individuals of the generation returning from the Vietnam War, I, still young enough at 18 to not have been conscripted, was intrigued by their experiences and often sought out their narratives. It was during these conversations that I became exasperated by their discussions of the regulations governing the conflict. One such regulation stipulated a fictitious boundary that American troops were prohibited from crossing, resulting in a paradoxical situation where we would advance to engage the enemy only to retreat in compliance with the stipulated rules. I recall a narrative in which individuals discussed the strategic conquest and subsequent relinquishment of a hill, only to repeat the process in adherence to established rules. This anecdote serves as a poignant depiction of the concept of dual-line theology. I intend to draw connections to this narrative upon my return.

Individuals who have delved into the realm of philosophy are likely familiar with the principle of non-contradiction, which posits that a statement cannot be simultaneously true and false within the same context. This principle applies to various facets of life, such as being both guilty and innocent, active and passive, or spiritually complete and incomplete at the same time within the same context. Despite our purported adherence to high standards of truth, our teaching methods often lack coherence and logical consistency.

Individuals who impart conflicting teachings are essentially suggesting that the concepts of good and evil are interchangeable. By asserting that humans possess the ability to embody both good and evil simultaneously, within the framework of free will, they are implying a futile pursuit of balance. This perspective negates the tangible experiences of success and failure within our lives. In reality, we are unified beings experiencing a singular reality, rather than attempting to exist in opposing states simultaneously. Living a Christian life involves using language to articulate genuine reality. Our spoken words reflect the true intentions of our hearts. It is hypocritical to embrace contradictions while simultaneously condemning those who seek spiritual enlightenment.

The concept of a God who offers both love and hate allows for a balanced understanding of justice and potential actions. Without the possibility of God's intervention, our hope, faith, love, and unity would lack true depth and meaning. Trust in a personal God would be reduced to mere wishful thinking rather than a tangible reality. The idea of God as a figure who holds a proverbial carrot encourages us to align ourselves with His will, but true relationships require a mutual exchange of give and take. Ultimately, God's salvation is characterized by His intention to guide us towards complete fulfillment and success.