Agency And Love

[Akboy]

I’m a Protestant, not a Mormon, but I’ve talked with quite a few Mormons, including a new co-worker. We were recently talking about differences and similarities in our beliefs, and it reminded me of articles and posts I’ve read about agency and love in LDS doctrine. So I have a few questions about agency, which lead into questions about love.

Agency

It’s clear that agency, our free will to act for ourselves and not to be acted upon, is very important in LDS doctrine. Yet other aspects in the doctrine seem to contradict that. Search ‘eternal life’ or ‘salvation’ on lds.org and you’ll find many articles that talk about how we need to follow the laws and ordinances of the gospel, obey God’s commandments to the best of our ability and endure to the end if we want to get to the highest kingdom of glory. If we don’t do those, we will be eternally separated from the Father in heaven.

So what choice do we really have? Would anyone really knowingly choose one of the lower kingdoms of glory? Can there really be a choice when there’s basically only two options, eternal rewards or eternal consequences? You may technically have free will when a gun is held to your head, but the consequence of disobeying the person holding the gun is a major influence on the choice you make. How can we have free will when eternal consequences are coercing our choice?

In LDS doctrine, God sounds more like an overbearing, strict parent who wants the best for his kids, but ends up having so much control and influence that the kids have trouble developing their own personality and making wise choices for themselves. Yes, parents need to have rules and enforce them with consequences. Imagine a parent who daily says stuff like ‘Follow as many of my rules as you can, or I’ll cut off contact with you when you grow up.’ Can you imagine the psychological and social problems those kids would have? If it’s wrong for a parent to strictly enforce their rules with extreme consequences, why is it okay for God?

Love

Wouldn’t a loving God give us teachings on how to live a fruitful, productive life, without coercing us into following those teachings by threatening us with eternal separation from Him? He would let us demonstrate our love for Him by choosing to follow His teachings without big consequences hanging over our head.

Imagine two couples get married and each one vows, to have a long, loving marriage. With couple A, the husband is concerned his wife won’t live up to their vows, so he writes up a detailed ‘Love Plan,’ which includes stuff like mandatory weekly date nights and monthly gift exchanges. Couple B has similar goals, but they take a different approach. The husband has a busy job, but he still makes time every week for a date night because he wants to spend time with his wife. They often surprise each other with gifts because they enjoy seeing their spouse happy.

Both couples end up doing many of the same things, but are they both in loving relationships? How can wife A even love her husband? The majority of their interaction is based on following the Love Plan. If she strays from the plan, she risks significant consequences. Wife B isn’t focused on any strict plan or worrying about long-term consequences, so she’s free to love her husband just for the sake of loving him.

Obviously, a Love Plan wouldn’t lead to much love in a marriage, so why would God create a similar plan for us?

[BlueDreams]

This won’t be the fullest answer because I’m technically supposed to be writing a paper by midnight. Procrastination just feels really good right now.

On agency:

It’s clear that agency, our free will to act for ourselves and not to be acted upon, is very important in LDS doctrine.

No… moral agency is important. Free will (or our will unfettered by any sense of grounds), where any action is equally possible and important means that our actions become meaningless. Our lives here are meant to fulfill a purpose. We are here to choose what we truly desire. Our agency is seen in our capacity to choose between good and evil, not simply in the ability to make any choice whatsoever.

So the commands of God are not a contradiction but an understanding of our options and what is needed to choose God.

So what choice do we really have? Would anyone really knowingly choose one of the lower kingdoms of glory?

“Wherefore, men are free according to the flesh; and call things are given them which are expedient unto man. And they are free to choose liberty and eternal life, through the great Mediator of all men, or to choose captivity and death, according to the captivity and power of the devil; for he seeketh that all men might be miserable like unto himself.”

Yeah. We choose by what we desire. We don’t see the option put in such stark terms. Satan is the father of all lies. In LDS scripture, Cain chose evil, not because he really saw it as captivity and death, but because he believed in the lie that he would be free by choosing to mock god, kill his brother, and take ownership and power of earthly things.

Can there really be a choice when there’s basically only two options, eternal rewards or eternal consequences? You may technically have free will when a gun is held to your head, but the consequence of disobeying the person holding the gun is a major influence on the choice you make. How can we have free will when eternal consequences are coercing our choice?

Eternal consequences aren’t coercing, they’re enticing. It’s not a gun to the head, it’s a fact. Our choices aren’t unfettered from consequence or meaning. I can no more choose to be outside eternal laws that govern the universe than I can be free to step off my balcony and float. If I knowingly choose evil things, evil will become apart of who I am and I am trapped. If I knowingly choose God, God has place to make me truly free.

In LDS doctrine, God sounds more like an overbearing, strict parent who wants the best for his kids, but ends up having so much control and influence that the kids have trouble developing their own personality and making wise choices for themselves.

Do you see what God’s kids get away with in this life??? He’s not an overbearing parent. In fact to many he comes off a little light handed and could use more immediate punishing techniques. I mean some of his kids literally get away with murder. He simply tells us the rules. He states: you have a choice, your choices can take you away from home and into dark and dreary paths or if you listen to me I’ll bring you back home. I want you to come home, but all will have their choice as to who they want to become. It’s not really about choice and consequences….it’s more along the lines of becoming and reaching our fullest potential. Our fullest potential is to be like God. There is no better option out there….you can’t really beat perfection. So when you choose to not follow Him, you are not simply choosing Yale from Harvard and disappointing your father for not choosing his alma matter. There’s not another equally viable option. It’s not a preference choice. It is choosing God or no God…who do you desire to become?

Love

Wouldn’t a loving God give us teachings on how to live a fruitful, productive life, without coercing us into following those teachings by threatening us with eternal separation from Him?

It’s not a threat anymore than telling your child that if you touch a stove while it’s hot you will get burned. It’s a loving warning of the full consequence of our actions. A loving parent would not leave their child without the understanding of what the dangers of an action will be. And furthermore, in LDS theology, because we are here it indicates that we agreed and put faith into this plan. We knew what it could mean but also knew that it was the only way to truly have the freedom to choose what we desired to become

And your spouse analogy assumes we are on equal footing with the Lord. Spouses are equal in partnership. Plan A doesn’t work because it defeats the ideals of a marriage. Of course its not love. But we are not God’s spouse, we’re His children. We are not equal in power, knowledge, or sight. We’re children who still haven’t figured out this whole walking business yet, let alone fully what it is to truly move and function in our full potential. Our position is in a place to learn from the Master of all to become all that we are capable of. The only one who knows how to be like God, is God. The only one who can explain and define and set the ways of Christ is Christ. Everyone else is in the same boat: limited knowledge, just learning how to toddle across this place called earth. It’s not only not constricting to have your parent to teach you how to walk and talk, it would be absolutely unloving.

With luv,

BD

[pogi]

The way I see it is that there are eternal spiritual laws which have natural and sometimes eternal spiritual consequences for all thoughts, words, and actions. God loves us enough to warn us about those thoughts, words, and actions which cause suffering in mortality and eternity, much like a parent warning a child about a hot stove, or a marriage counselor warning against raising voices. He promises that we wont be burned if we don't touch the stove, he makes no such promise if we choose to touch it. In spiritual matters, temptations are much more subtle and deceitful than a red hot stove, and our agency becomes a matter of seeking, learning, listening to and ultimately following the still small voice that is love.

Why do you think that God revealed the idea of heaven and hell to man if not to motivate him away from hell and towards heaven? What are his commandments if not roadmaps to recognize and experience true love? Christ said that all of the law and the prophets stem from love. In other words, if you follow them, you find love.

We don't consider the commandments to be mere suggestions, nor do we consider them to be restrictive, but we consider them to be privileges and blessings which enlighten and enlargen the soul beyond what is capable to be understood otherwise.

You make it sound like we are being micromanaged by God, that simply is not the case. He teaches us correct principles and guidelines in how to be one with Him, then He lets us govern ourselves and frees us to be co-creators with Him for good, however we so choose.

There are different levels of motivation for obedience including fear, duty, and love. Good, better, best. It is easy to see God using all three of these types of motivations throughout scripture to inspire obedience to Him. This is a spiritually evolutionary process for most people that develops as we practice keeping the commandments and learn to hearken to the spirit in our lives until we love Him, as you say, just for the sake of loving Him. That is the ultimate goal, but not everybody is there yet. How should we love Him? How does He want to be loved? He answered this by saying "if ye love me, keep my commandments."

Edit: Just read bluedreams post. It appears the hot stove analogy is popular among Mormons

Edited April 5, 2013 by pogi

[MormonMason]

Wouldn’t a loving God give us teachings on how to live a fruitful, productive life, without coercing us into following those teachings by threatening us with eternal separation from Him? He would let us demonstrate our love for Him by choosing to follow His teachings without big consequences hanging over our head.

No offense intended, but have you ever actually read your whole Bible? or just the standard, salvation proof texts? The reason I ask is that even Jesus taught that there are dire consequences for the violation of certain things. For example, if you do not forgive your brother from your heart you will be delivered to the tormentors like the person in the parable.

In another case, those who teach people to break even the least commandment of the Law would be called least in the kingdom of heaven. In yet another, if you love Jesus, keep his commandments. If you keep the commandments the Father will do certain things (but what happens if you don't?). Paul was worried that he might be disqualified if he did not work hard and do what was necessary to control his body. Those who aren't properly prepared for the marriage feast will be cast into the outer darkness. For those who sin willfully after receiving a knowledge of the truth there will be no more sacrifice for sins. If you hate your brother you are a murderer and murderers don't have eternal life abiding in them. Those who hope for eternal life will work good but those who don't obey the truth will receive anger and wrath, etc.

Do any of these biblical concepts, all of them from the New Testament, sound even vaguely familiar? Yet, would you feel that the God of the Bible is not a loving God? And, we certainly have choice. As it is written, "Choose you this day..." We do not choose the consequences, however.

And, sometimes, with us rebellious humans, God sometimes needs literally to "scare the hell out of us."

Edited April 5, 2013 by MormonMason

[Maidservant]

Choice and agency (not the same thing, but connected) in and of themselves are fascinating and endless topics and topics of great importance that all human beings wrestle with in order to pursue happiness or something like happiness in their lives. There are a lot of things in our life that we have some control over (choice); and a great many more things that we have no control over (no choice). It's obvious that this world is infected with oppression and captivity and even those choices that many take for granted, or choices that we might all have if the world were a little more peaceful and loving, those choices simply aren't available to the majority of humans--choices like being able to eat enough every day, or being able to attend school, or things like this.

But I think what is amazing about our struggle in this life is exactly what kind of agency we are willing to live when we have very little or no choice. When the forces of this world press in upon us, and our hearts, bodies, minds fail us--what, still, then, in the end, do we choose? Do we choose to see the glass half full? Do we choose to forgive? Do we choose to share our widow's mite? Do we choose to affirm life in the midst of our trials? Or do we let ourselves become hard and give in to death/"death" in the midst of our trials? Do we use our agency to be agents of God, or do we use our agency to be the agent of the Adversary?

The process of this life is not about receiving a reward due to the balance of our acts at the end of our life. This is not salvation, or as I understand it. First of all, the balance of our acts will always fall short. If we can be called good in any way, it is through the merits of our Savior, Jesus Christ.

Rather, the process of this life, that our Father in heaven is guiding us in, is to become like Him; that is, to be full of love, full of truth (etc etc etc). We can only become these things in the face of great refiner's fires, not in the absence of any struggle. That is salvation--to become.

By the way, welcome to the board.

Edited April 5, 2013 by Maidservant

[CV75]

Obviously, a Love Plan wouldn’t lead to much love in a marriage, so why would God create a similar plan for us?

Proper use of moral agency begets more moral agency. God has ultimate agency, and so He chooses only that which is good, and He has the freedom to choose the best, and the understanding and availability of all the choices to choose the best.

Also, a man with little agency cannot help another as much as man with a lot of agency. A man with a lot of agency will not leave another without the help he needs. This is the same kind of relationship a child has with his father, and that we have with God.

How much agency one possesses is governed by how much he wants. God gave man his agency and allows him to develop and build it from there, according to each person’s self-determined wants and needs. He instructs us on how to advance. The potential is limitless but not required, imposed or inevitable. This is why people end up in different kingdoms. There are not only two options.

Until we see with the eyes of faith and the power and influence of the Holy Ghost, we will see God as the same kind of parent we experienced without these advantages. The goal is to see Him as He is, which is much better than that.

Teaching us of eternal separation comes as part of knowing the choices, and is presented to most as a warning, and to a few as a threat. It depends on how God needs to speak to that child.

The Lord’s Atonement is big, and so the consequences of the Atonement are big in relation to how one handles it in terms of exercising his agency.

The Plan of Salvation is an expression of God's intelligence (thoughts) and love (feelings). True love is true oneness, a union of thoughts and feelings, temporal, physical, spiritual and eternal. The Gift of the Holy Ghost allows us to see and navigate the plan in its true light. Just as revelation and the influence of the Holy Ghost come to us in the form of thoughts of the mind and feelings of the heart, agency is an expression of the thoughts of the mind and the feelings of the heart. The plan is to share these in perfect unity with God.

[mfbukowski]

The highest form of freedom is not the absence of rules- it is self-determination. Self determination is living the rules and standards we have accepted for ourselves so we can become the best we can be- and essentially overcome the natural man.

We accept natural laws to govern our lives- and those laws just happen to be God's law as well. Standards and rules MAKE freedom possible, and don't detract from it.

How free would we be to walk down the street if another wanted to be free to drive on the sidewalk? Such rules create freedom for both the walker and the driver- because of traffic lights, the driver is not in an accident at every intersection.

When you understand that freedom is about accepting law, you will understand it all.

To become the best you can be, there must be a "best" as a standard you have set for yourself, and you must conform to it.

Edited April 5, 2013 by mfbukowski

[pogi]

Imagine a parent who daily says stuff like ‘Follow as many of my rules as you can, or I’ll cut off contact with you when you grow up.’ Can you imagine the psychological and social problems those kids would have? If it’s wrong for a parent to strictly enforce their rules with extreme consequences, why is it okay for God?

A couple things here. First of all, I disagree, I think parents should always strictly enforce their rules. Parent need to set very clear boundaries for their children with very clear consequences that they always follow through with. Children need consistency, they need to know what to expect from you. Children always respond better to clear boundaries. They learn that they can believe you, and a healthy trusting relationship is developed with parent and child. This is the same relationship I have with my Father in heaven. I know I can believe Him and trust Him when he says there will be consequences to both obedience and disobedience.

Second, you are right, parent's consequences should not be extreme, and I don't think God's consequences are extreme. He is perfectly just and merciful. I don't know of a more merciful plan than the plan of salvation. I don't know of a more merciful God than the one who revealed it to man. Our concept of hell is much different than the rest of Christianity. It is a much, much smaller place (fewer people there) than is found in other Christian faiths. Temple work is the crown and jewel which testifies of God's work and mercy for all his children, including those that are not Christian such as the Jew, Muslim, Hindu, Buddhist, etc. All of these are not forgotten to God, and all of these have a place in the plan of salvation in Mormonism and are capable of celestial glory. The sinner and saint alike, all have part in his grace if they so desire it.

Third, generally speaking, it is not God that usually cuts off contact with us, it is we who cut off contact with Him through disobedience like the prodigal son. The Father is always waiting with open arms no matter what wrong we have done. Disobedience is a form of pride, it is "my will, not thine be done." It is enmity with God on our part. It is us willfully detaching ourselves from Him and essentially communicating "I don't love you above all else."

Edited April 5, 2013 by pogi

[CASteinman]

I am going to respond to just your questions. You have some other views and opinions that should be challenged but I am not going to do that.

A. So what choice do we really have?

B. Would anyone really knowingly choose one of the lower kingdoms of glory?

C. Can there really be a choice when there’s basically only two options, eternal rewards or eternal consequences?

D. How can we have free will when eternal consequences are coercing our choice?

A'. We have a variety of choices and decisions to make such as: The choice to listen to the spirit or not. The choice to follow the guidance of the spirit or not. The choice of repenting and bringing our behavior in conformance with God or not. And a whole world of Choices. A whole Mortality of Choices.

B'. I think some people might. The story is told that if we knew what it was like to get into the lowest kingdom we would commit suicide to get there -- and that might just accomplish the trick.

C'. These two options hold perhaps an infinite number of possibilities. Nevertheless... as the Ancients taught -- there is the way of Life and the Way of Death. We get to choose our way.

D'. The consequences do not coerce. They exist and exercise no pressure upon us that we do not choose to allow to be put upon us. Any such pressure is pressure we choose to put upon ourselves. And it is probably a good thing to put some pressure on ourselves.

E. Can you imagine the psychological and social problems those kids would have?

F. If it’s wrong for a parent to strictly enforce their rules with extreme consequences, why is it okay for God?

E'. I can imagine it would be a problem. Fortunately your parody of God is not quite as God is and so this is more of a red herring question.

F'. Generally speaking -- is it wrong? Did God say it was wrong? More focused on our real world: there are a variety of reasons, not the least of which is -- that we choose what and how we shall enforce rules here in this fallen world. But one of the rules God has given us is "I the Lord will forgive whom I will forgive, but unto you it is given to forgive all men". (We also get to choose if we will follow that rule).

G. Wouldn’t a loving God give us teachings on how to live a fruitful, productive life, without coercing us into following those teachings by threatening us with eternal separation from Him?

G'. No.

H. Both couples end up doing many of the same things, but are they both in loving relationships?

I. How can wife A even love her husband?

J. why would God create a similar plan for us?

H'. Maybe. Maybe not. Every marriage seems to have a different dynamic. I don't feel inclined to judge.

I'. Any wife who chooses to love her husband, loves her husband. And vice versa. At the same time, any wife who chooses to not love her husband does not love him -- and vice versa. These choices are separate from your scenarios. Its ok if we do not know these things. We are not supposed to. Marriages are different have have different dynamics.

J'. He didn't. You did that. It was your scenario that falls under that condemnation.

Now.. having answered your questions, I invite you to take some time to find out what Mormons actually believe.

What you have done is a bit offensive. You tell us what you imagine our beliefs are, then close in with "gotcha" questions centered on your beliefs of faith and grace -- which have their own problems.

[telnetd]

Rather, the process of this life, that our Father in heaven is guiding us in, is to become like Him

... like him, a god. You left out the most important part (Moses 1:39).

Gail

[bluebell]

Do you have kids akboy? In regards to agency, one thing I've learned as a parent is how often child will choose a course of action that they know is going to lead to some kind of misery, but do it anyway.

Don't underestimate our ability as humans to often give up what we want most for what we want at the moment. We are not at all logical creatures in that regard.

[3DOP]

Akboy

Can there really be a choice when there’s basically only two options, eternal rewards or eternal consequences?

3DOP

Many people exercise their free agency not by choosing between the limited options you mention. Of course heaven tomorrow is better than hell tomorrow. No one prefers eternal consequences over eternal rewards. There is no conflict here. Agency enters because of the complication of choosing between results today and results tomorrow. The formula presented fails to take into consideration that all religious believers, LDS or not, wrestle with the question of living the temporal satisfactions of today rather than practising faith based precepts which promise mostly benefit for tomorrow.

Akboy

Wouldn’t a loving God give us teachings on how to live a fruitful, productive life, without coercing us into following those teachings by threatening us with eternal separation from Him?

3DOP

It appears to me that your argument is against virtually all of Christianity, Orthodox Judaism, and Islam. They all threaten severe negative consequences for not following prescribed precepts. The Catholic Tradition to which I subscribe clearly teaches that love is a better motive than fear. But fear, rather than love, is always presented as "the beginning" of knowledge, or "the beginning" of wisdom. Babies need discipline which learns to recognize negative consequences for harmful behavior. When we become Christians we are like babies. We are immature and we benefit from negative discipline. Love is for the mature, but sometimes when our love grows cold, fear can still save us.

I believe loving earthly fathers teach their little ones with deprivation of privileges, and slaps on the wrist or even the behind lovingly intended to teach the little one to fear what will be harmful. Our heavenly Father is no different. He uses both negative and positive discipline. Fear and love.

But of all Christians, you should understand that LDS hold that Hell will be sparsely populated. Most will get out eventually. What is a thousand years compared to eternity? I reject your apparent notion that fear is an inappropriate motive for God's children. But if I was troubled at the doctrine of eternal Hell, I would tend to find Mormonism more compatible to my sympathies than almost any other Christian body.

3DOP

Edited April 6, 2013 by 3DOP

[Maidservant]

... like him, a god. You left out the most important part (Moses 1:39).

Gail

I don't think I left it out even though I may not have used that term.

"He that loveth not knoweth not God; for God is love." 1 John 4:8