Why don't most LDS like Grace?

[deacon blues]

As I look at my life I come to feel a great deal of gratitude; and most of the things I am grateful for: health, family, beauty, and love, seem to have been given to me by God, or if you prefer, The Creator, or Chance, or anything else you may call it. I have worked to develop some of my talents, but I can't take credit for the nature that blessed me with them, or the nurture of parents, teachers, and others that helped me develop them. I note that LDS views of the gospel seem to emphasize work, and trying to be a little better every day. The idea that a thief on a cross might, in the last moments of his life, come to recognize God, and be blessed by him, seems to rub them the wrong way. Why is that? Doesn't it seem to proper to appreciate a loving God who would bless us however, and whenever, he can.

[Not Buying It]

As I look at my life I come to feel a great deal of gratitude; and most of the things I am grateful for: health, family, beauty, and love, seem to have been given to me by God, or if you prefer, The Creator, or Chance, or anything else you may call it. I have worked to develop some of my talents, but I can't take credit for the nature that blessed me with them, or the nurture of parents, teachers, and others that helped me develop them. I note that LDS views of the gospel seem to emphasize work, and trying to be a little better every day. The idea that a thief on a cross might, in the last moments of his life, come to recognize God, and be blessed by him, seems to rub them the wrong way. Why is that? Doesn't it seem to proper to appreciate a loving God who would bless us however, and whenever, he can.

Like so many things in the Church, it is about control. An emphasis on "Works" makes members feel like they have to do every little thing they are told to - the ecclesiastical arm of the Church runs completely on unpaid volunteers, to keep the thing running they need members to believe "Works" are important. Without bishops, stake presidents, Youth leaders, Primary teachers, etc., the whole thing falls apart. If members start thinking "Works" aren't all that important, they stop doing all the crap that leadership foists on them to keep the Church running like it does on unpaid labor. "Grace" completely undermines the engine that keeps the Church chugging along.

Because most members serve in the Church not because they want to, and not because they care all at much about the other members they serve - most serve because they think they have to, due to the emphasis on "Works".

[document]

[funny story]

I emphasized grace in gospel doctrine and a member said, "What you are saying makes no sense. If I work an entire day and you work a half a day, God wouldn't pay us the same". I offended him in my response: I thought he was joking and I laughed. In that same lesson, we covered the parable of the workers in the vineyard (where those who worked an entire day and those who worked an hour were paid the same).

[/funny story]

I do appreciate the balance in early Mormonism. Ignoring the exception of denial of the Holy Spirit, all are extended grace merely by being born: their sins are forgiven them and all enter into heaven. Once they are in heaven it is their works that elevate them in heaven to a greater kingdom. All receive reward, and some receive greater reward than others based upon their level of work in this life.

This however, has been thrown out the window with the development of Mormon hell. While the doctrine could be presented as three kingdoms of glory, separation from my children for all of eternity is hell. Therefore, the religion has shifted back over time to a "you get your family or you do not". While they call it a "kingdom of glory" it reminds me much of a "court of love": what is bad is given a good name. God has your children and your spouse, and you cannot get it without completing the works.

However, even with this emphasis on works, it doesn't take away the fact that a man who has had his life filled with coffee and tank tops can convert at 78, go to the temple at 79, and die at 80 getting the same reward as the person who has lived the perfect life. Grace is, by its nature, unfair. And in a religion that emphasizes works so heavily, this just seems to "cheat the system".

[Corsair]

Because most members serve in the Church not because they want to, and not because they care all at much about the other members they serve - most serve because they think they have to, due to the emphasis on "Works".

I think you are spot on. The implied retirement plan for a faithful LDS couple is senior missionary service and frequent temple service. There is a delightful elderly woman in my ward who attends an endowment session or two every single day following this plan. I don't doubt her sincerity and I am glad that she has an activity that gets her out of the house every day and doing something with other people.

At the same time, virtually every person who attends the temple implicitly believes that they are building up blessings in heaven that are at least as good as working with the poor or performing service to living, mortal people. I'm sure there are members who keep a careful count of the number of proxy ordinances they have performed. The blessings are supposed to be real and you don't get them unless this explicit work is performed. It's like they are grinding out achievements on the Celestial XBox live.

It's not that the Doctrine of Grace is disliked. It is simply the consequences of decades of being told that you are being graded by the LDS point system. Virtue and piety are earned through rote performance of temple rituals which is more conventient than helping alleviate real suffering.

[Palerider]

There is a false doctrine taught in the D&C that forces Mormonism into a legalistic corner from which they cannot escape. D&C 130:20-21

"There is a law, irrevocably decreed in heaven before the foundations of this world, upon which all blessings are predicated—

21 And when we obtain any blessing from God, it is by obedience to that law upon which it is predicated."

Therefore, no blessing may be had, including salvation, unless the proper obedience work has been done to make ourselves deserving and worthy of the blessing.

It is beyond Mormon compression that God will give us what we haven't earned.

The truth however is that no human attains so much righteousness that they "deserve" heaven. There are Mormons who would like to think so but that is just self-righteousness peeking out from underneath their temple apron.
It isn't that God in his Grace is unfair. It's that He is MORE than fair. Mormon leadership suffers from from the same sin that the Pharisees did anciently when they heard the parable of the Prodigal Son. Just like the self-righteous son they couldn't be happy for the son who had returned and allow the Father to give him whatever he chose to.

Same with the laborers as mentioned earlier in this thread. They get the promised reward but can't stand to see the Master be generous to others as He wills.

"Forgiveness" and "Mercy" are refraining from giving someone the punishment they deserve.
"Grace" is giving someone BETTER than they deserve. And ancient Israel was given better than they deserved many times. We are given unearned blessings all the time, without obeying a predicated law.

Why do they (Mormon leadership) think the Savior asked the rhetorical question, "Why callest thou me good? there is none good but one, that is, God." No person has the right to call themselves "good" in the sense that they deserve salvation. No phony method of measuring righteousness (such as a temple recommend) can make us pure or worthy before God. It can only give us a false sense of our own righteousness and an avenue for comparing ourselves to others who don't have one.

Mormon leadership should be ashamed for not ridding the religion of this disease that infects them.

[Mormorrisey]

It's not that the Doctrine of Grace is disliked. It is simply the consequences of decades of being told that you are being graded by the LDS point system. Virtue and piety are earned through rote performance of temple rituals which is more conventient than helping alleviate real suffering.

Yep, that's the truth there.

I would only add there are Mormons who actually feel threatened by the gospel of Grace. Some years ago I taught Utchdorf's talk on grace in HP, and one guy kept hammering away at "but, we need to be obedient" every five minutes. You could tell he felt real angst at what Utchdorf was saying. It's as if his whole life was threatened by this heretical doctrine that he didn't HAVE to do his home teaching. It was rather odd, and only a couple of years later did I start to realize the truth of the LDS points system, and how it affected this guy, who will go down to his grave stressing about the things he needs to do. It's as if they really don't believe Jesus's burden is light, there's some catch to it.

[LaMachina]

I agree, Mormons tend to get pharisaical about this stuff and many of their 'works' are just busy work that tend to be of little practical value...BUT

...is there anything un-christian about the mormon view 'we are saved by grace after all we can do'? This seems to jive with the message of Jesus in the gospels. He certainly dismissed prideful and showy works but he also insisted on obedience and on works in accordance with one's ability. The laborers who only labored half the day still labored.

As someone who used to get frustrated with grace salvation theology it just felt a little lazy. And it didn't seem to line up with Jesus' position.

But maybe I misunderstand. To those claiming salvation by grace, is one saved mearly by declaring belief?

[achilles]

I guess I have three thoughts on this.

1. Decades of anti-Evangelical preaching has hammered away the concept of grace to nearly nothing in Mormonville. (ironically the good news of the euaggelion is that we are saved by grace)

2. We desperately want a checklist to follow. And to know that if we do x we get y. The reality of the universe is full of ambiguity and contradiction. Paradoxes abound. And that just doesn't sit well with the kid who asks "What do I have to do to get an A in this class?"

3. The resentment of the "obedient" toward the disobedient. There are at least two scriptural discourses on the subject:

a. The Parable of the Prodigal Son. (Luke 15:11-32) In my experience, this parable is usually discussed in the Church as a wonderful story of repentance and forgiveness. But lurking within the parable is the story of the good son. The one who feels cheated because he did everything he was asked to do and the prodigal gets the same reward (which to the obedient son just isn't fair). The good Mormon just doesn't see that they are the good son and need to just settle down and deal with the magnanimity of their Father's grace.

b. The Parable of the Workers in the Vineyard. (Matt 20:1-16). The Master accepts laborers all the way up to midnight, which means some worked 12 hours, others 6, and some only 1 hour. Yet they all receive the same reward. So galling to the ones that worked in the "heat of the day".

This resentment wishes to deny grace, and believe that "I earned this wage, and you didn't."

I like to bring these parables up when I can. It kind of throws a wrench into things.

[alas]

In order to believe in Grace a person has to believe in unconditional love. The Mormon General authorities even teach that God's love for us is not unconditional. These are men who cannot imagine continuing to love a child who disobeys, goes astray, comes out as gay. Even if and when they come back, these are men who are going to demand pain as proof of repentance. Look at how the book, The Miracle of Forgiveness says how you have got to SUFFER. Not enough that you see the error of your ways, you have got to SUFFER in order for the repentance to be good enough.

So, in the minds of our general authorities, the prodigal son needs to receive a good swift kick in the butt and be publicly humiliated, not come home to a father who is happy to see him, but a father who would take him in his rags and parade him before the community to be a lesson in being obedient to one's father. That is after all, what he deserves.

Most Mormons think there are people who *deserve* to receive food stamps, and those other druggies who are just too lazy to work and that most people on welfare need to go find a job. Many Mormons think, "I pay for my own health care and I don't want to pay for health care for those who are just too lazy to work" to quote a Mormon I know. There is a reason most Mormons are Republican and want to do away with Obamacare, welfare, food stamps. They can't stand the idea of anyone getting what they did not earn, and most of all, they do not want to pay for that something that the other did not earn.

[LaMachina]

The Miracle of Forgiveness says how you have got to SUFFER. Not enough that you see the error of your ways, you have got to SUFFER in order for the repentance to be good enough.

Good point. That's definitely a Mormon take that is decidedly un-Christian and negates grace.

I admit, despite many leftist leanings, I struggle with the idea of unconditional charity. Not love necessarily but 'charity' as in freely giving to all no questions asked. It's one of those idealist things that seems to fail on a practical level. But I'm also Canadian and really, really appreciate our healthcare system.

Edit: So does Jesus care about the free rider problem? This appears to be what Mormons fear. Can you be a free rider in Christianity?

[Give It Time]

To answer the OP, because it's a beautiful doctrine.

Back when I discovered grace and how healing it was, I went to a Relief Society lesson on the subject. This was a pre-Uchtdorf-talk lesson. The RSP was the teacher. I was going to raise my hand to comment, at the end, but her final pre-question comment shut mine down. It was the the scripture, faith without works is dead. She emphasized the "works" part. It was so important to her. It gave her such joy. She was the RSP and I was the ward pariah. I kept my mouth shut.

A few years later, Uchtdorf gave his talk. This same RSP gave the lesson on this talk. She made no mention of this talk expanding her understanding. Nope! She said, she had always believed in grace as taught by Elder Uchtdorf. I'm all, WTH? No! Of course, I stayed silent. She's the RSP and I'm the ward pariah.

[deacon blues]

When I was growing up in the church (60's-70's) I remember being taught that our position in this life was a result of our obedience in the pre-existence. This was the standard explanation for the priesthood ban. That explanation came back to embarrass the church, and so it has been disavowed to some extent. This explanation also de-emphasizes grace, since it was our good works in the pre-existence, and not the grace of God that determined our being born in an LDS family, and a relatively affluent society, instead of a third world country, that didn't have the gospel. Is anyone aware of recent talks that play up the Saturday's Warrior syndrome, that we are born into our present circumstances due to our valiance in the pre-existence?

[Ghost]

Perhaps because of my LDS background, I've never been able to understand the grace-and-only-grace view that some people hold. Attempting to harmonize grace and works the way Mormonism does just makes more sense to me than trying to make a case that works are totally irrelevant.

Aren't the denominations that emphasize grace the same ones that have the traditional concept of a hell that you end up in forever? Mormonism, in contrast, seems pretty universalist. All of the "extras," from baptism on, are requirements only for the Celestial Kingdom. And despite that one talk by Bruce R. McConkie, progression between kingdoms fits the Mormon "eternal progression" paradigm very well.

When I was in high school, I remember a friendly argument with a classmate who attended a non-denominational Christian church. I think he had specifically said that one reason Mormons would be in hell for eternity was that we believed that works mattered and that we hadn't been "saved" in the right way.

Setting aside the idea that the required steps to be saved properly sounded like works to me, I tried to get him to explain to me exactly how grace functioned in his mind. I proposed an example of a serial murderer who found sincere faith and was saved just before dying of old age. This person had murdered at least one person who, due to being killed at a young age by the murderer, hadn't had the same chance to be saved. My friend explained that the murderer would be in heaven and the victim in hell along with me.

Regardless of how representative my friend's view might have been, I still don't see how people make sense of the the relationship between grace and hell. And Jesus sure talked a lot about hell, at least in the record that we have.

[1smartdodog]

As I look at my life I come to feel a great deal of gratitude; and most of the things I am grateful for: health, family, beauty, and love, seem to have been given to me by God, or if you prefer, The Creator, or Chance, or anything else you may call it. I have worked to develop some of my talents, but I can't take credit for the nature that blessed me with them, or the nurture of parents, teachers, and others that helped me develop them. I note that LDS views of the gospel seem to emphasize work, and trying to be a little better every day. The idea that a thief on a cross might, in the last moments of his life, come to recognize God, and be blessed by him, seems to rub them the wrong way. Why is that? Doesn't it seem to proper to appreciate a loving God who would bless us however, and whenever, he can.

Like so many things in the Church, it is about control. An emphasis on "Works" makes members feel like they have to do every little thing they are told to - the ecclesiastical arm of the Church runs completely on unpaid volunteers, to keep the thing running they need members to believe "Works" are important. Without bishops, stake presidents, Youth leaders, Primary teachers, etc., the whole thing falls apart. If members start thinking "Works" aren't all that important, they stop doing all the crap that leadership foists on them to keep the Church running like it does on unpaid labor. "Grace" completely undermines the engine that keeps the Church chugging along.

Because most members serve in the Church not because they want to, and not because they care all at much about the other members they serve - most serve because they think they have to, due to the emphasis on "Works".

This exactly

[deacon blues]

Perhaps because of my LDS background, I've never been able to understand the grace-and-only-grace view that some people hold. Attempting to harmonize grace and works the way Mormonism does just makes more sense to me than trying to make a case that works are totally irrelevant.

Aren't the denominations that emphasize grace the same ones that have the traditional concept of a hell that you end up in forever? Mormonism, in contrast, seems pretty universalist. All of the "extras," from baptism on, are requirements only for the Celestial Kingdom. And despite that one talk by Bruce R. McConkie, progression between kingdoms fits the Mormon "eternal progression" paradigm very well.

When I was in high school, I remember a friendly argument with a classmate who attended a non-denominational Christian church. I think he had specifically said that one reason Mormons would be in hell for eternity was that we believed that works mattered and that we hadn't been "saved" in the right way.

Setting aside the idea that the required steps to be saved properly sounded like works to me, I tried to get him to explain to me exactly how grace functioned in his mind. I proposed an example of a serial murderer who found sincere faith and was saved just before dying of old age. This person had murdered at least one person who, due to being killed at a young age by the murderer, hadn't had the same chance to be saved. My friend explained that the murderer would be in heaven and the victim in hell along with me.

Regardless of how representative my friend's view might have been, I still don't see how people make sense of the the relationship between grace and hell. And Jesus sure talked a lot about hell, at least in the record that we have.

I certainly don't buy your high school friends's argument. It discribes a ridiculously unjust, and ridiculously unmerciful God. I believe in a merciful God, and if bible literalism takes people in another direction, that's one more reason to trust in a loving God more than a literal bible.

[LSOF]

When I was Mormon, I reasoned thus: "How are you supposed to overcome adversity and become a god if you have everything handed to you?" I interpreted "works" to mean not ordinances and rituals, but good deeds.

I still don't like grace, especially in conjunction with the doctrines surrounding sin, because that combination is abhorrent. That God gave his son over to be tortured, and this is supposed to absolve us of our sin, is an abhorrent doctrine. Since sin is anything God disapproves of, this means that God tortured his son, and somehow this would restore our standing in the eyes of God. But it only does that if we "believe in it". If we don't, then we are lost to our naturally and inescapably reprobate nature, and God gives us to the devil to torture for ever. Further, because God created us, our sinful nature is ultimately God's fault. To sum up, God created us faulty (therefore he execrates us) and will torture us for ever for it, unless we "believe in" his brutal torture of a demigod.

It gets even worse with the Trinity. God wanted to amend his screw-up. Therefore, under Trinitarian doctrine, he arranged to beget himself by one of his daughters (assuming all humans are children of God), let himself grow up, let himself be tortured and killed over a weekend, resurrect, and then ascend back into Heaven to take his place at his own right hand. Leaving aside the barbarism and silliness of blood sacrifice, we are now supposed to accept that God (who existed before the world was, who sees all and knows all, and who is omnipotent) was great and magnanimous to subject himself to a crappy weekend and say he did it "for us", three days being but a blink of an eye to God.

So, God created us faulty and would torture us for ever for it, except that he went through this giant charade of contrition (whether sacrificing himself to himself or his son to himself) and will forgive us for being the way we are on condition that we "accept" his "sacrifice". If we don't, we are still to be punished for it.

Grace is that God's charade of contrition is a "free gift" to us. Remember that its purpose was to ensure that we could be in good standing before God, despite our (God-given?) naturally and inescapably reprobate nature. God (being supposedly omnipotent and omniscient) was dissatisfied with the way he created us, and his "gift" to us is that he won't torture us for ever if we accept it. It seems a lot like a protection racket.

[mooseman]

We are now supposed to accept that God (who existed before the world was, who sees all and knows all, and who is omnipotent) was great and magnanimous to subject himself to a crappy weekend and say he did it "for us".

So, God created us faulty and would torture us for ever for it, but will forgive us for being the way we are on condition that we "accept" his "sacrifice".

The atonement--that weekend Jesus gave up to fix a problem he created and won't let us forget what he did for us. Classic!

I always understood works to be prosperity gospel stuff. We do it, get blessed and we owe Hesus 'cause he overpaid so we have to do more work, which he overpaid us for again, and on and on....til we die and we get grace because we're so overpaid we really sont deserve it but since he knows us he'll sneak us into the VIP area.

[moksha]

Grace is freely given and thus cannot be dependent on tithe offerings. That is reason enough to fear grace. It is not like you can build a Temple wall around the waters of life when they will flow outside the wall for all who wish to drink.

[2bizE]

Grace is difficult to understand for Mormons. Something for nothing is not in our culture. Even Uchtdorf tried to break down the grace barrier with his talk in GC.
He said "Salvation cannot be bought with the currency of obedience; it is purchased by the blood of the Son of God.26 Thinking that we can trade our good works for salvation is like buying a plane ticket and then supposing we own the airline. Or thinking that after paying rent for our home, we now hold title to the entire planet earth."

Mormons hold Christians who claim to have been saved in low regard. We think you can't just accept Christ as your savior and be saved. You have to go to RS each week or move people's furniture frequently in order to be saved.


https://www.lds.org/general-conference/ ... e?lang=eng

[Dravin]

Does grace require belief in and discipleship of Christ? I'm not trying to be smarmy here, it's a genuine question. If I have to believe and follow Christ then there is something I must do to benefit from grace and we've stepped, even if just so slightly, in works territory (not that works save me but that works are required for grace to apply). Which is fine, grace and works can certainly be portrayed as a continuum rather than a complete dichotomy.

I have encountered those who have said grace, completely, totally, and only grace. Their solution to the issue of the work of belief and discipleship was to attribute believing and discipleship to grace rather than works which mean belief and even following was a gift bestowed by god. The only issue there is if no action or work on my part determines if I'm a believer and disciple and thus a beneficiary of grace, then I cannot be held responsible for non-belief as it's god choice if I believe and if god isn't going to grace me with belief where is the justice or mercy in condemning me for not receiving something he's not choosing to give me? It's a weird rabbit hole to go down.