- This topic is empty.
-
Posts
-
I agree Ray, but I think it’s a terrible way to word it. I have known parents that withhold any demonstration of their love to children who are acting up, I think this just irritates the situation. I hate the thought of these actions getting some form of approval. Should a child see consequences for his actions? Absolutely. Should he feel shunned and unworthy of love? Absolutely not. Conditional love is not love at all, it is selfishness.
Conditional rewards is an entirely different subject, the key word for this discussion is love.
Orson wrote:I agree Ray, but I think it’s a terrible way to word it. I have known parents that withhold any demonstration of their love to children who are acting up, I think this just irritates the situation. I hate the thought of these actions getting some form of approval.
Should a child see consequences for his actions? Absolutely. Should he feel shunned and unworthy of love? Absolutely not.Conditional love is not love at all, it is selfishness.Conditional rewards is an entirely different subject, the key word for this discussion is love.
Well said.
I agree, Orson, that I would not have chosen to word it the way Elder Nelson did if I had given the talk. I agree totally. However, as I said, Elder Nelson was addressing an actual teaching within much of Christianity – and that teaching focuses on God’s love being such that we can do whatever we want and still be saved as long as we tell God how wonderful he is. I might disagree with the exact way he chose to word it, but the concept he taught is not wrong, imo – especially as it relates to the idea he was refuting.
That’s all I’m saying. It’s very easy to make the man an offender for a word (and, thereby, totally dismiss the message – which I have seen done in many places), but it’s much harder to consider the message he actually presented and grant that it was an important message but just had a less-than-ideal delivery method.
Rob and SD recently on another thread brought up the church teaching “conditional love”. I found this discussion in the archives from the past and really liked the points made about reward vs love.
Unconditional love scares me. It makes me think I am supposed to feel a certain way about others no matter what they do to me.
Conditional love scares me. It makes me feel cold that I use love as a manipulative tool.
I’m not sure what you all think if as a church we are taught conditional love or unconditional love.
But I love this…
HiJolly wrote:“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.
I think this goes back to our fundamental view of mankind. Some focus on “the natural man is an enemy to God” and others focus on “know ye not that ye are the sons of God” or as I put it in my Mormon Jargon post, we are “craven perverts in the image of God.” It’s a contradictory teaching, but that’s because some people prefer to think of our human failings and others prefer to think of our divine potential. I agree the message Ray refers to is important, but unfortunately the delivery method can be damaging to people who feel completely unworthy of God’s love. Blessings are not unconditional, I have no problem with that. Heber13 wrote:Unconditional love scares me. It makes me think I am supposed to feel a certain way about others no matter what they do to me.
Conditional love scares me. It makes me feel cold that I use love as a manipulative tool.
I’m not sure what you all think if as a church we are taught conditional love or unconditional love.
I think we are taught both, and people focus on different things as Hawk pointed out.
I don’t believe unconditional love says you are supposed to feel okay with people that hurt you. I believe you can love someone while you don’t like them. I believe you can love someone for the fact that they are a child of God while you absolutely detest their actions. Love in this sense is respect for their origins, and their potential — and while I believe a genuine “love” will curb tendencies to demonize or dehumanize, it is nothing close to a free pass. I believe love respects accountability.
hawkgrrrl wrote:I think this goes back to our fundamental view of mankind. Some focus on “the natural man is an enemy to God” and others focus on “know ye not that ye are the sons of God” or as I put it in my Mormon Jargon post, we are “craven perverts in the image of God.” It’s a contradictory teaching, but that’s because some people prefer to think of our human failings and others prefer to think of our divine potential.
I have heard that this perspective is often derived from how our parents treat us. If they are full of love and very supportive as they teach you, then you will tend to see God as someone on your side. If your parents rode you hard and never seemed to feel you were doing well enough, then you feel that you will never measure up to what God wants of you.I have not seen the science that backs it up, but at first blush it does make sense and does empirically to be a bit true.
LH, that makes it seem like we see God based on how we see ourselves, a reflection of ourselves. Yes, it does – and I think that tends to be correct. I think we see God either as like ourselves, personally or collectively, or opposite of ourselves, personally or collectively – based on how we feel about ourselves, personally or collectively. In other words, we see God based on whether we want God to be like us or opposite of us. The Israelites wanted a warrior God when they were being oppressed (opposite of themselves) and also when they were the oppressors / victors (like themselves). They were a warrior people, so they wanted a warrior God. In times of peace, we tend to want a peaceful, loving God – but when enemies obliterate towers and kill ours, we suddenly want a warrior God.
And it is possible Joseph Smith wanted an anthropomorphic God and Savior as 2 different beings. Especially since his earliest accounts of the vision recorded were about receiving love from God, and later about doctrines and other religions. I’m not saying that is what happened…but it is possible and follows that line of thought…that we see God in ways that relate to us. One view from 1832 from Joseph’s own hand, a 1835 Kirtland account, and a 1838 Nauvoo account.
I have a difficult time seeing God’s love as conditional. His miracles are not conditional .. Otherwise Saul would’ve never been converted. How could such a person have been considered deserving? Jona was not worthy to being saved. He was a slacker. Moses had issues. He murdered a man, hid the body, and fled the jurisdiction. He refused to circumcise his sons. His wife ended up doing it so that God wouldn’t kill Moses. We don’t really talk about his Ethiopian wife hunting him down in the desert. There are questions about whether she was an abandoned wife .. Blessings are not conditional. We like to think that we somehow “earn” our blessings through righteous living. I think God would be horrified by such thoughts. Such an attitude leads to the belief that life’s trials are really punishments. How come we forget about “Rain falling equally upon the wicked and the righteous”
I work with someone who doesn’t make a lot of money but he bought himself a Mercedes. He announced that he worked hard and he DESERVED the car. He arranged his finances so that he could afford the car. “Deserving ” doesn’t have any part of the equation. We buy things because we are financially able. It has nothing to do with what we deserve.
The Syrian refugees are the most deserving people on the planet right now. They may or may not be blessed with the desires of their heart — simple safety for their families. I had the experience of coming across 1000s of them last week in Budapest. A truly heart breaking situation .. Walking across a continent, looking for basic opportunities and safety.
We have no right to call God’s love or His blessings conditional. God is not so petty.
I think the varying ways we answer this question illustrate the concept that we each see God in whatever way we need to see God – or in whatever way makes the most sense to us. I know I do that. I want to believe in a God I want to believe in – and I want to believe in myself and my potential in a way that is powerful and meaningful to me. My view of God is a combination of those two things, perhaps almost wholly, and those two things are the main reason I believe in the God of Mormonism – or, at least, my own view of the God of Mormonism. My view might not be the mainstream view in some ways, but my view absolutely does not fit the view in any other religion I have studied that includes the concepts of a Savior and an atonement as I want to believe in them (which, again, are defined by how I want to envision God and myself and our relationship).
Ray: So people who love conditionally see God that way? People who are focused on every little detail of white shirt-edness .. They assume God cares about the color of their shirt.
That makes sense.
And with my world view, my viewpoint of God makes perfect sense.
We all bring our life experience to the table.
When I interact with someone who has a “conditional” viewpoint of God, it can feel like we don’t even belong to the same religious tradition. It seems so “John Calvin” to me. But I am sure they don’t “get” me either.
AP, I think it matters what we are talking about. Miracles, blessings, and cars are not God’s love. So conditions on them aren’t really relevant. Is God conditional with us? It seems so.
D&C 82:10
I, the Lord, am bound when ye do what I say; but when ye do not what I say, ye have no promise.
Is God’s love conditional?
1 John 4:19
We love him, because he first loved us.
That isn’t conditional. He has already loved us. So much He sent His son. None of us earned that. It just is.
I think God’s love is unconditional. But God is not beyond conditions or covenants on non-love matters.
Quote:Heber13 wrote:
D&C 82:10
“I, the Lord, am bound when ye do what I say; but when ye do not what I say, ye have no promise.”
What do you consider God to be bound to do? I’m not trying to be confrontational. I really want to know. Do you consider the blessings to be in this life? In the next? Both? What sort of promises do you think this scripture covers?
In my experience, perfect obedience didn’t bring health or protection from illness. It didn’t bring protection from catastrophic financial ruin. It didn’t bring answers to righteous prayers asked in full faith. I have always wondered if I was interpreting the scripture wrongly .. If I was expecting too much.
Many years ago, I was the biggest TBM out there. I followed EVERY rule, every commanent, and lived a very righteous life. I still live a very righteous life, I just lack belief in the truth of the Church.
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.