- This topic is empty.
-
Posts
-
I am referring to Robinson’s “Parable of the Bicycle.” In a nutshell the parable says that a girl wants a bike and is told if she can save the money she can get one. Eventually realizing that she can never save enough pennies, the merciful father tells her to give him the 61 cents she has saved and gives her the bike. The 61 cents is in this case all that she can do. I’ve been pondering Pres. Uchtdorf’s talk quite a bit. I get the difference he points out of
afteras opposed to because. However, he also makes it clear that none of us are doing all that we can do and it doesn’t matter anyway because of the principle of grace. For those that think keeping the commandments is all that we can do, he said we actually keep the commandments because we love God, not to earn our way to heaven – and he did say we can’t buy our way in. I have always liked the parable of the bicycle because it does demonstrate grace, and I do understand that there is something to the “all that we can do” (although that might be believing in Christ and little more).
Does the parable of the bicycle break down here? Would God really take the 61 cents (not that we need it either)? Is there even a need for the 61 cents? Is grace so universal that it is a free gift to all who believe (which, we are told, will eventually be everyone – every knee shall bow, every tongue shall confess)?
DarkJedi wrote:I am referring to Robinson’s “Parable of the Bicycle.” In a nutshell the parable says that a girl wants a bike and is told if she can save the money she can get one. Eventually realizing that she can never save enough pennies, the merciful father tells her to give him the 61 cents she has saved and gives her the bike. The 61 cents is in this case all that she can do.
I’ve been pondering Pres. Uchtdorf’s talk quite a bit. I get the difference he points out of
afteras opposed to because. However, he also makes it clear that none of us are doing all that we can do and it doesn’t matter anyway because of the principle of grace. For those that think keeping the commandments is all that we can do, he said we actually keep the commandments because we love God, not to earn our way to heaven – and he did say we can’t buy our way in. I have always liked the parable of the bicycle because it does demonstrate grace, and I do understand that there is something to the “all that we can do” (although that might be believing in Christ and little more).
Does the parable of the bicycle break down here? Would God really take the 61 cents (not that we need it either)? Is there even a need for the 61 cents? Is grace so universal that it is a free gift to all who believe (which, we are told, will eventually be everyone – every knee shall bow, every tongue shall confess)?
I wonder if there are people in the world that their ability to gain almost any money feel about this analogy.I don’t think Brad Wilcox agrees with the bicycle analogy in his talk
His grace is sufficentThose are the kinds of things that have been going through my head these past couple weeks, LH. I have Robinson’s book and Wilcox’s book, and the point is well made that while they are respected individuals they are not GAs. That’s why I think it was great to hear the same type of thing from a GA – and a member of the FP no less. The thing that’s been sticking in my mind about the parable of the bicycle is that it could be construed as either because of or after all that we can do and I’m not sure either of them is really totally correct. So where does the 61 cents come in, if it comes into play at all? Maybe it’s like the line in A Poor Wayfaring Man – “these deeds shall thy memorial be.” We do put the 61 cents down. They’re a marker connected with us and our earthly life, but the deeds themselves don’t pay our way any more than a gravestone can resurrect us. They just indicate where we’ve been. For myself, I am feeling a bit jipped in the 61 cent department, and if I hear or read one more suggestion that doing the basics will make this life glossy I may kick a cat. I did all the basics, with sincerity, faith, hope, commitment – and my present reward is…….
I didn’t do it for rewards. I still see blessings in my life. I can find good, joy, calm, happiness, but my boat got sunk. According to the LDS successful life description this FC should never have happened to me. So my cents were like pearls to swine.
mom3 wrote:For myself, I am feeling a bit jipped in the 61 cent department, and if I hear or read one more suggestion that doing the basics will make this life glossy I may kick a cat.
I did all the basics, with sincerity, faith, hope, commitment – and my present reward is…….
I didn’t do it for rewards. I still see blessings in my life. I can find good, joy, calm, happiness, but my boat got sunk. According to the LDS successful life description this FC should never have happened to me. So my cents were like pearls to swine.
You just described the beginning of my FC, Mom. I really do know this feeling exactly. (I try to be nice to cats, though
I see this as coming from two perspectives. 1) That all Christian churches (except maybe universalist) require something in exchange for salvation – even if only a belief in Christ. Therefore salvation is not really free – we only differ on the cost. JC being the giver of the gift can set the conditions for receiving the gift at His descretion.
2) That the LDS church doesn’t really believe in grace at least not in the way that it is currently viewed by much of Pauline Christianity.
LookingHard wrote:I don’t think Brad Wilcox agrees with the bicycle analogy in his talk His grace is sufficent. Now Brad isn’t a G/A, but he was on the SS board something or other for a while. I have also noticed Sherry Dew seems to be beating the Grace drum also.
I loved Bro. Robinson’s book “Believing Christ” and read it early in my faith crisis. I was dismayed when the scripture verses used by Bro. Robinson to build his case for grace were given different spin and interpretation by LDS GA’s. I felt betrayed when I read Bro. Robinson’s follow up book “Following Christ” and saw page after page of arguments for grace only applying to faithful Mormons (IOW grace gets TBM’s to the CK, everyone else gets to stew in their own merits).
I love that Bro. Wilcox too is emphasizing grace but in trying to tie it back to the LDS theology that we all know and are comfortable with he takes the heart out of it for me. According to what I read in the talk God’s grace gives me the ressurrection and a deferral of final judgement for at least the length of my lifetime. As long as I draw breath there is room for me to grow and to change and to become (by adhering to LDS norms and standards) into something worthy of heaven. This is grace that does not impose the immediate eternal damnation punishment for every infraction. To me it is like saying that the plan of Salvation/Happiness is grace. It was there all along – we just called it something different. Yeah grace!
:wtf: DarkJedi wrote:Is there even a need for the 61 cents? Is grace so universal that it is a free gift to all who believe (which, we are told, will eventually be everyone – every knee shall bow, every tongue shall confess)?
This is long, and I suppose some would say it’s too “lenient,” but I really liked some of the writing because it almost gives grace a personality/identity of its own.Quote:Grace is love that seeks you out when you have nothing to give in return. Grace is love coming at you that has nothing to do with you. Grace is being loved when you are unlovable…. The cliche definition of grace is “unconditional love.” It is a true cliche, for it is a good description of the thing. Let’s go a little further, though. Grace is a love that has nothing to do with you, the beloved. It has everything and only to do with the lover. Grace is irrational in the sense that it has nothing to do with weights and measure. It has nothing to with my intrinsic qualities or so-called “gifts” (whatever they may be). It reflects a decision on the part of the giver, the one who loves, in relation to the receiver, the one who is loved, that negates any qualifications the receiver may personally hold… Grace is one-way love.
Grace doesn’t make demands. It just gives. And from our vantage point, it always gives to the wrong person. We see this over and over again in the Gospels: Jesus is always giving to the wrong people – prostitutes, tax collectors, half-breeds. The most extravagant sinner of Jesus’s day receive his most compassionate welcome.
Grace is a divine vulgarity that stands caution on its head. It refuses to play it safe and lay it up. Grace is recklessly generous, uncomfortably promiscuous. It does’t use sticks, carrots, or time cards. It doesn’t keep score. As Robert Capon puts it, “Grace works without requiring anything on our part. It’s not expensive. It’s not even cheap. It’s free.” It refuses to be controlled by our innate sense of fairness, reciprocity, and evenhandedness. It defies logic. It has nothing to do with earning, merit, or deservedness. It is opposed to what is owed. It doesn’t expect a return on investments. It is a liberating contradiction between what we deserve and what we get. Grace is unconditional acceptance given to an undeserving person by an unobligated giver. It is one-way love.Ann, where did you find that? It’s incredibly empowering. Put it together with Uchtdorf and I find hope. Thanks. Yes, he takes our 61 cents, because we offer it to him and he rejects no good faith offer. We give what we can, which isn’t enough but is enough. He saves us prior to, during and after the giving, because it isn’t the gift that is important but simply the giving. At least, that is my take right now. As with everything else, I reserve the right to find a description that works better for me In the future.
Old-Timer wrote:Yes, he takes our 61 cents, because we offer it to him and he rejects no good faith offer. We give what we can, which isn’t enough but is enough. He saves us prior to, during and after the giving, because it isn’t the gift that is important but simply the giving.
At least, that is my take right now. As with everything else, I reserve the right to find a description that works better for me In the future.
That is beautiful, Ray. That’s how I believe the atonement or Christ’s grace works for us all.
🙂 Old-Timer wrote:Yes, he takes our 61 cents, because we offer it to him and he rejects no good faith offer. We give what we can, which isn’t enough but is enough. He saves us prior to, during and after the giving, because it isn’t the gift that is important but simply the giving.
At least, that is my take right now. As with everything else, I reserve the right to find a description that works better for me In the future.
I like that framing.Here’s where the parable breaks down for me: “if she can save the money she can get one” The father gives his daughter the impression that she is capable of doing it on her own. That’s not the way the atonement is taught.
I mentioned this in some other thread. When Jesus performed the miracles where he fed the masses he simply asked his disciples for the provisions that they had on them, he was able to bless those and feed the multitudes. Jesus didn’t impose a minimum quota. There was no appreciable period of time where people operated under the stress of acquiring enough bread and fish for Jesus. After all they could do represented a small snapshot in time. Everything they could do had already been done, Jesus performed a miracle.
In the 61 cents parable I suppose the dad could have asked “How much have you got on you right now?” accepted that offering and then blessed the effort by providing the remainder to purchase the bike. In the modified version the girl already knows that she can’t buy a bike on her efforts alone but the key difference is that she doesn’t spend her childhood wallowing in despair. Remember, all this time she’s struggling to come up with the money to purchase the bike herself she has no idea whatsoever that the father plans to step in and take care of the balance. She’s operating under despair that somehow raising the money is all on her. If she’s incapable of raising all the money herself she’s doing something wrong (sound familiar?). Again, I don’t think that’s how we teach the atonement.
I agree, nibbler – but if everyone was told they could have whatever they want with no effort many would make no effort – and, imo, it is the growth that matters, not the size of the offering itself. I think that is what the story is trying to say, in the end. The 61 cents isn’t a perfect analogy for me, if every detail is analyzed and dissected – but nothing else is, either. I’m okay with a message that says we do what we can, no matter how little that is, and God makes up the difference. I think the key is what you and Pres. Uchtdorf have said – that we shouldn’t be guilt-ridden about our best effort and that we aren’t saved or aided or loved or accepted only AFTER we have exhausted ourselves in the doing.
If grace was an easy thing for everyone to understand, it would have been settled at some point during the last 2,000 years.
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.