- This topic is empty.
-
Posts
-
I got this link from Rock Waterman’s blog last night. It is a talk from Elder Nelson in 2003 where he says the teaching that God’s love is unconditional is an “anti-Christ” teaching. He claims God’s love to us is conditional.
Nelson, goes into great detail why he believes this. He quotes several scriptures to prove his point. But what about the scriptures he neglects? I can think of two examples The story of Johna and the Whale. Read Johna chapter 4 and tell me that the message is not God loves all his children no matter what?
The other scripture is one of the shining lights of Christianity. John 3:16 ” For God so LOVED the world…”
I have always felt God’s love even when I don’t follow the commandments. My life experience has shown me that God Always loves me. The scriptures tell me that God loves me. So why is Nelson using God’s love like this?
I just read the link. The Mormon church sure has made a mess of the gospel, IMO. I think it is possible to “offend” god. But when one says that they feel love even when they don’t keep the commandments, I have to question what that means. Do you mean that you feel love when you break GOD’S commandments, or when you break the LDS church’s commandments? They are not the same thing.
I find it very hard to “feel gods love” when I am angry, or bitter, or mean-spirited.” I doubt I could “feel god’s love” if I was out committing adultery, or physically and emotionally abusing my wife.
I find it VERY easy to “feel god’s love” even when I don’t do my HT, or my FHE, or if i drink a cup of tea, or miss unnecessary church meetings, or spend time cutting fire wood rather than go on the temple trip, or wear a blue shirt to church, or ………….
Okay, well, I had this question as well when I strayed away from the church for a while. And I had a LOOOOOONG talk with my mum about it. She has 5 children of her own, 1 stepchild and 2 foster children. So 8 altogether.
3 of those children betrayed her in a horrible way, claiming she abused them (which isn’t true). 2 of those children ended up having a police record which included imprisonment. Did she stop loving any of them? No. She still loves all of her children.
So, does God stop loving us when we break His commandments? No.
I do not think God’s love is conditional.
BUT, I wouldn’t want to hang out with a bunch of people in any gang, or with like the queen. So maybe that gives a bit of a feeling about why there are different Kingdoms of Glory. I prefer that over the “Heaven or Hell” concept.
Conditional? No. Elder Nelson made a grave error. God can’t make a silk purse out of a sow’s ear, but he can sure love the sow’s ear. Look at it this way. If God didn’t love Hitler and Saddam Hussein, could God be happy? God simply has to be either unhappy all the time, deaf and blind, or filled with rejoicing continually in everybody’s agency.
If you go to lds.org and run a search, you’ll find many talks that say God’s love is unconditional. My feeling about Elder Nelson’s talk has aways been that he was describing the manifestation of God’s love – in other words, the blessings that come through obedience – rather than the feeling God has for His children. You would be hard pressed to define as conditional the love described as “oustretched still” or compared to the maternal desire of a “hen who gathereth her chicks”.
I think Elder Oaks clarified this concept in his more recent address called (iirc) “Love and Law”.
Elder Nelson was asked to write the article with a particular emphasis and so was approaching the subject with a point in mind. So it’s not at all a balanced approach, and he says so (after the fact). It was not intended to be all encompasing, from his statement (which I can’t find right now, darn it!) Unconditional, overwhelming and universal love is an eternal attribute of God.
HiJolly
HiJolly wrote:Elder Nelson was asked to write the article with a particular emphasis and so was approaching the subject with a point in mind. So it’s not at all a balanced approach, and he says so (after the fact). It was not intended to be all encompasing, from his statement (which I can’t find right now, darn it!)
Unconditional, overwhelming and universal love is an eternal attribute of God.
HiJolly
HiJolly!
If you find it, please post this! I’ve had discussions with so many people since he gave that talk who have misconstrued his words, applying them like modern day Zoramites to elevate themselves over their “wayard” brethren.
I would love to be able to provide this context and change the tone of those discussions.
MnG
HiJolly, Can you explain what point he was asked to convey?
HiJolly wrote:Elder Nelson was asked to write the article with a particular emphasis and so was approaching the subject with a point in mind. So it’s not at all a balanced approach, and he says so (after the fact).
I thought I might address this in my post above. But I’ll just say I agree with you, HiJolly, and amend my statement conjoined with yours to say he made, in my opinion, a strategic error by choosing to do what he did. Law of unintended consequences and all that, you know.
behappy wrote:HiJolly,
Can you explain what point he was asked to convey?
That there is no blessing from God for sin. Some people seem to equate love with giving goodies.HiJolly
mercyngrace wrote:HiJolly wrote:Elder Nelson was asked to write the article with a particular emphasis and so was approaching the subject with a point in mind. So it’s not at all a balanced approach, and he says so (after the fact). It was not intended to be all encompasing, from his statement (which I can’t find right now, darn it!)
Unconditional, overwhelming and universal love is an eternal attribute of God.
HiJolly
HiJolly!
If you find it, please post this! I’ve had discussions with so many people since he gave that talk who have misconstrued his words, applying them like modern day Zoramites to elevate themselves over their “wayard” brethren.
I would love to be able to provide this context and change the tone of those discussions.
MnG
I know what you mean. I just looked thru my files and didn’t see it. The thing is, I don’t think it is a document, but rather an image of a letter. So it’s hard to find. I’ll look more later.
HiJolly
HiJolly- thanks for the explanation. Nelson’s article is a very funny way to say that God will not bless you if you sin. I now want to know how does God bless our lives? In conference over the weekend I heard that if you pay your tithing God will bless you with all sorts of things from the blessings of heaven to fire insurance to protecting you from divorce. Trouble is I don’t see God as giving anyone any of these “Goodies” regardless of their behavior or tithing status. The only way I see God blessing our lives is through His love. I don’t see God intervening in any other way. The idea that God blesses humans with goodies does not correspond with what I see in the world. Why would God bless my family with a house or safe travels when he allows children to go without food or allows the genital mutilation of little girls. Do I feel fortunate or blessed for my life? ABSOLUTELY!! But do I see God withholding or granting material blessing or protections to anyone? Absolutely not.
behappy wrote:HiJolly- thanks for the explanation. Nelson’s article is a very funny way to say that God will not bless you if you sin. I now want to know how does God bless our lives? In conference over the weekend I heard that if you pay your tithing God will bless you with all sorts of things from the blessings of heaven to fire insurance to protecting you from divorce. Trouble is I don’t see God as giving anyone any of these “Goodies” regardless of their behavior or tithing status. The only way I see God blessing our lives is through His love. I don’t see God intervening in any other way.
The idea that God blesses humans with goodies does not correspond with what I see in the world. Why would God bless my family with a house or safe travels when he allows children to go without food or allows the genital mutilation of little girls. Do I feel fortunate or blessed for my life? ABSOLUTELY!! But do I see God withholding or granting material blessing or protections to anyone? Absolutely not.
It’s pretty confusing, isn’t it. Do you think a valid or accurate understanding of God comes through science, or religion? Objective facts, or psychology?My view is that things happen to everyone, and our job is to fashion our world view primarily from what happens to us. Thus, being based on information only known in its entirety by ourselves, our lives become a reflection of our experience and how we deal with that experience. This is how religion works in relation to our lives. As you can see, it’s not an objective, scientific process. But we have to go through it, regardless of any objections as to how it works.
The Bible tells us to attribute all good things to the beneficence of God. And there is a very solid psychological reason to do so, if you “fear God”. I like the following quote:
“Isn’t it better to believe in a loving universe than a hostile one? We will be different people if we believe everything is motivated by love rather than if we believe everything is motivated by greed or hatred.
Beliefs are less statements about reality than meditative practices to change the believer’s attitudes.” ~~Toby Johnson in *Gay Spirituality*
I choose to believe God is generous and gives me blessings daily. My choice, yes, but that choice also delivers results in ways I can’t rationally understand. Experience tells me that it’s real for me, and that’s where the rubber meets the road.
HiJolly
Context is VERY important in this conversation, and Elder Nelson was addressing a fairly common belief in religion (even in some parts of Christianity) that God loves us so much that he would never punish us (or withhold blessings from us) – no matter what we do. That idea is known as “easy grace” in some circles. I wrote a post on my own blog in September of last year specifically about this topic. It is rather short, so instead of linking it here I simply will copy and paste the text:
Quote:God feels love unconditionally for every single, solitary, faithful or rebellious child – just as I do for my own children (including our “foster” children and those who simply lived with us for a while). My love for “my kids” is not restricted by biological ties; I love every kid who has used our house as a temporary, get-my-life-back-together sleeping pad unconditionally, as well. In this most fundamental way, God’s love truly is unconditional – and felt for and extended to all.
In the Bible, however, there is a
STRONGtheme of love being proven, expressed or manifested in action – that true love is MUCH more than just a feeling or emotion. (For example, “If ye love me, keep my commandments.” – John 14:15) This obviously pertains to us and our requirement to do more than say we love God. (”Not every one that saith unto me, Lord, Lord shall enter into the kingdom of heaven; but he that doeth the will of my father which is in Heaven.” – Matthew 7:21) Within this concept is the central idea that “love” also includes the “rewards” of love returned– of “reciprocal love” or “covenant love”. This type of “shared love” is NOT unconditional, as it requires the fulfillment of conditions in order to receive the rewards promised by the giver’s love.The giver’s unconditional love extends the reward to all, but only those who accept that offer and requite their own love in return receive the full, “unconditional” gift. (the gift that includes no condition or restriction but provides all to the receiver) The key addition to the Christian conversation of godly love by Mormonism is that FULL, godly love exists only in a covenant relationship, where the receiver reflects the gift and unlocks the door to the rewards promised by God to His children who truly do “come follow me”. I didn’t quote a particularly relevant verse in that post, but I also would add here the idea that “ye are my friends, IF ye do whatsoever I command you.”
I love my kids more than anything and yet I have given them a good spanking , yelled at them and even made them do terrible chores or go to bed early.
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.