Lord, Lord, Have We Not....?

[wenglund]

I wholeheartedly disagree.

Fear is a horrible motivator when it comes to obedience. It leads to resentment and hypocrisy.

Someone who acts only out of duty will begrudge having to do so, and we know what a gift given grudgingly gets you.

There is NO reason why love cannot be the initial, primary, and sole motivating force for our efforts to be obedient. It's not like love is some mystical force hidden from us. It is part and parcel of who we are and it is our own fears that keep it buried.

So, no, I don't think we progress to love from a beginning of fear or duty. We start with love.

If love were the only motivator for spiritual progression, then I would expect that it would have been the only motivator that God would have used on his children. Yet, the scriptures are replete with instances where God has motivated his children through fear, through reward, through a sense of duty, as well as through love. Some people pay tithing because they fear the destroying fires. Some people pay tithing because they will be blessed. Other people tithing because that is their duty. Still others pay tithing because they are moved to do so out of love, and it is simply their nature to give. And, to me, regardless of the motive behind paying the tithes, the offerings are acceptable before God, though it is expected that as one matures spiritually, one will ultimately pay tithes out of love and as is their nature.

So, while you are correct that one can start with love, it is my perception of history that many people don't. Instead, they progress, line upon line, through the various levels of motivation.

Elder Oaks gave a wonderful conference talk on this when he was first ordained an apostle.

Thanks, -Wade Englund-

[Calm]

I don't believe so. The Samaritans lacked faith, at least according to the Jews.

The Good Samaritan was presented as an exception, not a typical Samaritan, from the way I read it so I don't think that any such judgment based on such standards work with his character. If he was the exception to the rule when it came to compassion for one's enemy, I think it likely that Jesus would have described his character as faithful as well since he was created as an example of the ideal (not an example of a Samaritan or any other group). Edited November 6, 2012 by calmoriah

[Mark Beesley]

I don't believe so. The Samaritans lacked faith, at least according to the Jews.

It would seem rather odd for the Savior to use the story of the Good Samaritan as an example immediately after telling the Jews to love their neighbor and being asked who their neighbor was if, in fact, this particular Samaritan was not acting out of love, and I believe that was what I was referring to, not whether or not he had any particular brand of faith . . . just love.

[Mark Beesley]

If love were the only motivator for spiritual progression, then I would expect that it would have been the only motivator that God would have used on his children.

I don't think that is quite what I said, but I can see where one might read that into what I wrote.

Yet, the scriptures are replete with instances where God has motivated his children through fear, through reward, through a sense of duty, as well as through love.

My reading of the scriptures indicates that although the writers attributed fear and duty to God, in the end analysis, those motivators failed to produced the desired results.

Some people pay tithing because they fear the destroying fires.

Do they? Love isn't the primary motivator? I dunno. . . Are these people regular, faithful tithe-payers.

Some people pay tithing because they will be blessed.

And they desire the blessings because they love the Lord.

Other people tithing because that is their duty.

And the desire to fulfill their duty grows out of their love for the Lord.

Still others pay tithing because they are moved to do so out of love, and it is simply their nature to give.

I truly believe that every person who pays tithing regularly does so out of love. I truly believe love is the foundation for all giving. All of your other examples, I do not believe, would result in a person being a faithful, regular tithe-payer.

And, to me, regardless of the motive behind paying the tithes, the offerings are acceptable before God, though it is expected that as one matures spiritually, one will ultimately pay tithes out of love and as is their nature.

And if love does not become the foundation, they won't be a regular, faithful tithe-payer, IMO.

So, while you are correct that one can start with love, it is my perception of history that many people don't. Instead, they progress, line upon line, through the various levels of motivation.

Do you have any specific historical examples in mind.

Elder Oaks gave a wonderful conference talk on this when he was first ordained an apostle.

Do you have a link? Thanks.

All that being said, yes, the Lord has used "fear" to entice people to keep the commandments. An adequate example comes from Section 19 of the Doctrine & Covenants:

7 Again, it is written eternal damnation; wherefore it is more express than other scriptures, that it might work upon the hearts of the children of men, altogether for my name’s glory.

8 Wherefore, I will explain unto you this mystery, for it is meet unto you to know even as mine apostles.

9 I speak unto you that are chosen in this thing, even as one, that you may enter into my rest.

10 For, behold, the mystery of godliness, how great is it! For, behold, I am endless, and the punishment which is given from my hand is endless punishment, for Endless is my name. Wherefore—

11 Eternal punishment is God’s punishment.

12 Endless punishment is God’s punishment.

Thus, it appears that God used the threat of never-ending punishment for disobedience to the commandments to motivate His children to obey, even though He knew that He was giving them a misleading impression. But I can think of no example in the scriptures where people successfully transitioned from obedience out of fear to obedience out of love . . .

I take that back, Alma the Younger made such a transition.

I had to look back at Vance's post that I initially responded to, and I believe my objection is to the suggestion that as a rule a person can transition from fear-bound obedience to love-bound obedience. I believe such a transition is more the exception to the rule, because, in my experience, fear does not produce sustainable results. And may I dare say it, I think God thinks so also, which is why we have Section 19.

[volgadon]

I agree with Vance here.

"An action has intrinsic meaning; its value to the world is independent of what it means to the person performing it. The act of giving food to a helpless child is meaningful regardless of whether or not the moral intention is present. God asks for the heart, and we must spell out our answer in terms of deeds."

- Abraham Joshua Heschel, "Between God and Man: An Interpretation of Judaism," p. 157.

It is better to feed that child out of fear, or from frivolous reasons, than not to feed that child at all. Where the heart comes in to play is in our relation to God. In the scripture quoted by the OP, Christ doesn't condemn the people for their actions, those are important no matter the reasoning, but for the intent of their hearts.

[Calm]

I had to look back at Vance's post that I initially responded to, and I believe my objection is to the suggestion that as a rule a person can transition from fear-bound obedience to love-bound obedience. I believe such a transition is more the exception to the rule, because, in my experience, fear does not produce sustainable results. And may I dare say it, I think God thinks so also, which is why we have Section 19.

I think what can be used to motivate obedience has a lot to do with what is being asked to be obeyed.

I doubt the value of teaching true compassion through fear, but certainly taking care of the poor can be done so. I think those who would actually be tempted to murder someone probably would be more liely to obey a teaching based on fear rather than love. Progression from one motivator to another depends, I believe, a great deal on the context of how the teachings are presented....one cannot keep teaching solely fear and assume the one being taught will eventually grow past that level. A child though would likely realize in time if the things s/he were instructed with fear were obviously dangerous to health that their parents were using fear as a teaching method out of loved and thus be able to move toward obedience out of love. Otoh, if fear was used with a child for all instruction, even in cases where obedience was relatively trivial (for example colouring within the lines), then of course the child would be intellectually confused and emotionally crippled and unable to get the shift from primarily fear based to primarily love based.

[harfad]

Matthew 7:22-28

22 On that day many will say to me, ‘Lord, Lord, did we not prophesy in your name, and cast out demons in your name, and do many mighty works in your name?’

23 And then will I declare to them, ‘I never knew you; depart from me, you workers of lawlessness.’

My question:

I recently have been asking my friends and even my pastor, who are many are who are being referred to here. Kinda scary to think that many people will come to stand before God expecting to spend eternity with God to find out otherwise. I do not want to be one of them. That is why I eagerly seek to understand this verse better and would value your thoughts.

I think the answer is given in verse 23 (quoting from KJV):

"Depart from me, ye that work iniquity."

I like the KJV version better. I think it is addressing the issue of faith versus works. Everybody knows that you cannot perform miracles, and prophesy, without faith. If they had been doing all of those things, then they must have had faith. They were rejected, however, in spite of their faith, because of their evil works. In other words, at some point they had turned to sin, in spite of their previously manifested faith. The scripture explains it more clearly:

"For although a man may have many revelations, and have power to do many mighty works, yet if he boasts in his own strength, and sets at naught the counsels of God, and follows after the dictates of his own will and carnal desires, he must fall and incur the vengeance of a just God upon him." (D&C 3:4)

By "mighty works" is meant miracles and signs etc. In other words, if you have faith to do all of those things, and then turn to sin, your faith will not save you (unless you repent). It dpeaks against two false doctrines: "faith alone," and "once saved, always saved." Faith alone will not save anyone, and you are not saved until you are saved (at the last day). It vindicates the following verse in the Book of Mormon:

"But this much I can tell you, that if ye do not watch yourselves, and your thoughts, and your words, and your deeds, and observe the commandments of God, and continue in the faith of what ye have heard concerning the coming of our Lord, even unto the end of your lives, ye must perish. And now, O man, remember, and perish not." (Mosiah 4:30)