On Love, on Charity, and on Salvation.

[2ndRateMind]

I am not at all sure that the early church fathers distinguished between these two; love, and charity.

Quote

And now abideth faith, hope, charity, these three; but the greatest of these is charity.*

Quote

And now these three remain: faith, hope and love. But the greatest of these is love.**

But these days we do so distinguish. Love is a (sometimes fierce) sentimental attachment, charity is the gift of money or, more rarely, time and attention, to the needy.

Assuming some distinction necessary; my own position would be that charity is the sacrifice love makes, and given that for sure the world's needs whatever sacrifices it can get, it must also need that motifying imperative that is love.

On this I take directly from the Gospels:*** 

Quote

 Beloved, let us love one another: for love is of God; and every one that loveth is born of God, and knoweth God. He that loveth not, knoweth not God. For God is Love.

So, can you be saved if you do not love? Can you love if you do not gift charity? Collapsing the two, can you be saved if you do not gift whatever charity you can? Reversing the two, if you do not gift whatever charity you can, are you saved?

Best wishes, 2RM.

*1 Corinthians 13:13 KJV

**1 Corinthians 13:13 NIV

*** 1 John 4:7 - 8 KJV

Edited May 29, 2018 by 2ndRateMind

[Connie]

The LDS definition of charity is that it is "the pure love of Christ." This comes from the Book of Mormon in Moroni chapter 7. 

Starting in verse 44, it states, "...for none is acceptable before God, save the meek and lowly in heart; and if a man be meek and lowly in heart, and confesses by the power of the Holy Ghost that Jesus is the Christ, he must needs have charity; for it he have not charity he is nothing; wherefore he must needs have charity.
And charity suffereth long, and is kind, and envieth not, and is not puffed up, seeketh not her own, is not easily provoked, thinketh no evil, and rejoiceth not in inquity but rejoiceth in the truth, beareth all things, believeth all things, hopeth all things, endureth all things.
Wherefore… if ye have not charity, ye are nothing, for charity never faileth. Wherefore, cleave unto charity, which is the greatest of all, for all things must fail—
But charity is the pure love of Christ, and it endureth forever; and whoso is found possessed of it at the last day, it shall be well with him.
Wherefore… pray unto the Father with all the energy of heart, that ye may be filled with this love, which he hath bestowed upon all who are true followers of his Son, Jesus Christ…”

Charity, to the LDS people, includes love. It is so much more than just giving money or service, though it does include those things.

Moroni 10:21 states, “…except ye have charity ye can in nowise be saved in the kingdom of God; neither can ye be saved in the kingdom of God if ye have not faith; neither can ye if ye have no hope.”

And Ether 12:34 states, “And now I know that this love which thou hast had for the children of men is charity; wherefore, except men shall have charity they cannot inherit that place which thou hast prepared in the mansions of thy Father.”

So the answer to your question is no. One cannot be saved without charity. It may, however, depend on how you are defining “saved.” LDS beliefs distinguish between physical salvation and spiritual salvation. See this link for further details: https://www.lds.org/manual/true-to-the-faith/salvation?lang=eng

[zil]

Charity (bible dictionary), Charity (topical guide), Love (topical guide)

[2ndRateMind]

Thanks both, for your useful contributions.

Connie, I can't help but notice the similarity between the scripture you quote from the Book of Mormon, and from Paul's letter to the Corinthians:*

Quote

Charity suffereth long, and is kind; charity envieth not; charity vaunteth not itself, is not puffed up, Doth not behave itself unseemly, seeketh not her own, is not easily provoked, thinketh no evil; Rejoiceth not in iniquity, but rejoiceth in the truth; Beareth all things, believeth all things, hopeth all things, endureth all things.

Best wishes, 2RM

*1 Corinthians 13:4-7 KJV

Edited May 29, 2018 by 2ndRateMind

[Jane_Doe]

50 minutes ago, 2ndRateMind said:

Thanks both, for your useful contributions.

Connie, I can't help but notice the similarity between the scripture you quote from the Book of Mormon, and from Paul's letter to the Corinthians:*

Of course: God's Truth is ever consistent.  True charity is the love pure love of Christ, and a person cannot be saved without that love. 

 

Side note: I've noticed that many secular people confine "charity" to be just giving of money.   This is not the LDS definition at all.  Charity = love .  SO much more than writing a check.  

Edited May 29, 2018 by Jane_Doe

[2ndRateMind]

22 minutes ago, Jane_Doe said:

Of course: God's Truth is ever consistent.  True charity is the love pure love of Christ, and a person cannot be saved without that love. 

I'm inclined to agree (somewhat). I do think that humanity's understanding of 'God's Truth' has varied down the ages, and that (with good hope, a fair wind and a downhill slope) gradually, over historic time,  we tend to converge on that truth. Meanwhile, though we might all have different theories of heaven, I cannot conceive of a heaven that is not both the vindication and the permanent residence of 'the pure love of Christ'.

Best wishes, 2RM

PS. Did you ever get to see the Bishop Micheal Curry's Sermon at Harry and Meghan's Wedding? 'Raw God', according to the Archbishop of Canterbury. I don't mind admitting, I wept throughout. But I'm a sentimental old thing, really. A pure stream of consciousness advocating love guarantees to hit me right where my tear-ducts are sensitive.

Edited May 29, 2018 by 2ndRateMind

[2ndRateMind]

So, just to keep this thread going, the Credit Suisse estimate of total world wealth is $241 trillion. The wikipedia estimate of Gross World Product is $107.5 trillion. An estimate of global charitable giving, in an age where some few are seriously rich, and a third of the world's population are absolutely poor, is $410 billion, or 0.004% of annual world production. We surely need more charity in the world. If charity is the product of love, we surely need more love, too. My question for the forum is: How do we arouse that love, given that such love would save the world temporally, and spiritually, too?

Best wishes, 2RM.

Edited May 30, 2018 by 2ndRateMind

[Jane_Doe]

1 minute ago, 2ndRateMind said:

So, just to keep this thread going, the Credit Suisse estimate of total world is $241 trillion. The wikipedia estimate of Gross World Product is $107.5 trillion. An estimate of global charitable giving, in an age where some few are seriously rich, and a third of the world's population are absolutely poor, is $410 billion, or 0.004% of annual world production. We surely need more charity in the world. If charity is the product of love, we surely need more love, too. My question for the forum is: How do we arouse that love, given that such love would save the world temporally, and spiritually, too?

Best wishes, 2RM.

Dude, we just talked about how LDS view charity is much MORE than writing checks-- rather it's the pure love of Christ.  Why then instead do you focus on check writing?

[2ndRateMind]

13 minutes ago, Jane_Doe said:

Dude, we just talked about how LDS view charity is much MORE than writing checks-- rather it's the pure love of Christ.  Why then instead do you focus on check writing?

Because I think the world needs more cheques written, with the beneficaries either the absolutely poor, or such NGOs as are committed to relieving their plight. We might all say; 'I love people, and God's world', but unless we are prepared to sacrifice the extent of our personal bank balances by writing cheques, I am not entirely sure how deep that love is, and what use it is.

Best wishes, 2RM.

Edited May 30, 2018 by 2ndRateMind

[zil]

The answer is inherent in the question.  Bring people to Christ.  Problem solved (once they've all been brought to Christ).

[Jane_Doe]

5 minutes ago, 2ndRateMind said:

Because I think the world needs more cheques written, with the benficaries either the absolutely poor, or such NGOs as are committed to relieving their plight. We might all say; 'I love people, and God's world', but unless we are prepared to sacrifice the extent of our personal bank balances by writing cheques, I am not entirely sure how deep that love is, and what use it is.

Oh love is SO much more than checks!   Do you really not see the use of it?

[NeuroTypical]

21 minutes ago, 2ndRateMind said:

My question for the forum is: How do we arouse that love, given that such love would save the world temporally, and spiritually, too?

One way to arouse that love, is to try to educate 2ndRateMind on the ways dollars can help charity and love, and how it can hinder them.  Because as things stand now, he borders on idolatry with all of his obsessive dwelling on currency.

[2ndRateMind]

8 minutes ago, Jane_Doe said:

Oh love is SO much more than checks! 

Of course it is.

Quote

Do you really not see the use of it?

Indeed I do.

The ancient Greeks may be pertinent here. They had 7 types of love, of which Agape, soul love, general love irrespective of just desert, may the most relevant. This is the type of love I would most like to see the societies of the world endorse, and encourage. But, I revert to my previous point: charity is a sacrifice. No love, no sacrifice, no charity.

Best wishes, 2RM.

[Guest MormonGator]

1 minute ago, 2ndRateMind said:

charity is a sacrifice.

Wrong. It requires generosity, which is vastly different. 

[NeuroTypical]

1 minute ago, 2ndRateMind said:

OBut, I revert to my previous point: charity is a sacrifice. No love, no sacrifice, no charity.

Giving money is one way to sacrifice.  It sure the holy heck ain't the only way.

And taking money from someone else, in an attempt to do some sort of good, sort of kills the entire point of sacrifice in the first place.  (I realize you are on record as being against that, not saying otherwise.  Just making sure it stays in the conversation - it's a relevant point.)

[2ndRateMind]

22 minutes ago, NeuroTypical said:

One way to arouse that love, is to try to educate 2ndRateMind on the ways dollars can help charity and love, and how it can hinder them.  Because as things stand now, he borders on idolatry with all of his obsessive dwelling on currency.

It's quite simple, really. Some have more currency than they need, maybe even more currency than they could ever spend, whether they deserve that or not. And some have less currency than they need, and will die as the result, whether they deserve that or not. One does not need moral philosophy to inform one that this is fundamentally wrong, and a (voluntary) readjustment of the world's wealth distribution would be 'a good thing'.

Best wishes, 2RM.

 

[Jane_Doe]

Just now, 2ndRateMind said:

It's quite simple, really. Some have more currency than they need, maybe even more currency than they could ever spend, whether they deserve that or not. And some have less currency than they need, and will die as the result, whether they deserve that or not. One does not need moral philosophy to inform one that this is fundamentally wrong, and a (voluntary) readjustment of the world's wealth distribution would be 'a good thing'.

@2ndRateMind, with all due respect, I'm also getting the impression you idolize currency.  LDS do not.  If all you want to talk about is your idol, I don't feel a lot of common ground to even have a conversation, particularly one so important as true charity. 

[Guest MormonGator]

3 minutes ago, 2ndRateMind said:

 Some have more currency than they need

In your opinion.Thankfully, you don't get to tell me how much "currency" I need. 

[2ndRateMind]

1 minute ago, MormonGator said:

In your opinion.Thankfully, you don't get to tell me how much "currency" I need. 

Indeed not. That's your own affair, between you and God, come Judgment Day.

Best wishes, 2RM.

[NeuroTypical]

7 minutes ago, 2ndRateMind said:

It's quite simple, really. Some have more currency than they need, maybe even more currency than they could ever spend, whether they deserve that or not. And some have less currency than they need, and will die as the result, whether they deserve that or not. One does not need moral philosophy to inform one that this is fundamentally wrong, and a (voluntary) readjustment of the world's wealth distribution would be 'a good thing'.

Baseless assumption that cannot stand up to critical thought: "Transferring currency is [the best, or even a good] solution to societies ills".

Learn!

Edited May 30, 2018 by NeuroTypical

[2ndRateMind]

8 minutes ago, Jane_Doe said:

@2ndRateMind, with all due respect, I'm also getting the impression you idolize currency.  LDS do not.  If all you want to talk about is your idol, I don't feel a lot of common ground to even have a conversation, particularly one so important as true charity. 

Hmmm. I don't 'idolise' currency. I just have a healthy respect for what it can do, in saving lives. That seems to me to be a charitable purpose, but if you have a better position, by all means expound.

Best wishes, 2RM.

Edited May 30, 2018 by 2ndRateMind

[Vort]

Thought experiment for @2ndRateMind:

Let's assume the world is worth $241 trillion. Let's also pretend it's all fungible commodities and not things like streets, ports, municipal buildings, and other such infrastructure.

Let's also assume that the world's human population is eight billion people.

Dividing the former by the latter suggests that every human being in the world has a share of right around $30,000.

So here's the thought experiment. Let's give each person his or her $30 grand in whatever currency is durable and meaningful -- maybe precious metals or some such thing. Now, let's let the world go on its way, assuming that people still go to work and buy things and so forth. Here's your $30,000. Good luck.

Let's revisit the situation a year later. Some people have kept their cash and worked hard, selling things to other people. Those others have willingly paid out some of their $30,000 share to get the goods or services offered by this entrepreneurial group. As a result, some people have WAY MORE than $30,000. Some might even have $100,000. Meanwhile, some people have, through their own free choice, spent much or perhaps all of their $30,000. Some are dead broke. They have wasted their money buying, I don't know, cigarettes or alcohol or porn or European vacations or whatever.

What do we do now, @2ndRateMind? Do we gather up all the world's cash and forcibly redistribute it again?

Don't the entrepreneurs have a right to the fruits of their labor? Is there some inherent evil about telling people that they get to experience the fruits of their choices, for good or for bad?

Assuming we follow your model and redistribute, shall we do so every year? Maybe every six months? Every month? Every day? Twice a day?

Let's just assume we have a continuous redistribution model. At any given moment, your bank account balance is exactly 1/8 billionth of the total world value. That never changes, no matter how much you spend or how scrupulously you save.

Do you really believe anyone will work any more? Will anyone do anything other than pursue immediate gratification of short-term interest? There is literally no measurable reward for hard work or doing a good job. Sure, your efforts increase the value of the world -- but you personally will only ever see one-eight billionth of that. That means that if your Herculean efforts result in a net increase to the world of, say, a hundred million dollars, your share of that amazing increase you have caused will be about a cent.

How is this sustainable, @2ndRateMind? How does your communist utopia work? Help us understand how love and charity figure into your wealth redistribution.

Edited May 30, 2018 by Vort

[Jane_Doe]

6 minutes ago, 2ndRateMind said:

Hmmm. I don't 'idolise' currency. I just have a healthy respect for what it can do, in saving lives. That seems to me to be a charitable purpose, but if you have a better position, by all means expound.

Honestly, I'm getting the firm impression money is your god.  It is your only focus, your claimed remedy for all ills, etc. 

I'm trying really hard not to be disrespectful when I say the above, and apologize that I'm coming up short in that regard.

[2ndRateMind]

19 minutes ago, Jane_Doe said:

Honestly, I'm getting the firm impression money is your god.  It is your only focus, your claimed remedy for all ills, etc. 

I'm trying really hard not to be disrespectful when I say the above, and apologize that I'm coming up short in that regard.

Actually, not. My 'God', is what is absolutely right, and good, and just, and fair, and kind, and honest, and noble, and brave. Because it is my belief that God exemplifies all these attributes, and more absolutes beside. And I cannot see that, thus described, any such conception of God would be happy with the current economic state of the world, such that 1% of people control as much wealth as the remaining 99% put together, and many of our poorer brethren die because they cannot afford adequate food and clean, fresh water. All it would take to achieve the righting of that wrong, it seems to me, is some sacrifice, some money, some charity, some love.

Best wishes, 2RM.

Edited May 30, 2018 by 2ndRateMind

[Overwatch]

9 minutes ago, 2ndRateMind said:

Actually, not. My 'God', is what is absolutely right, and good, and just, and fair, and kind, and honest, and noble, and brave. Because it is my belief that God exemplifies all these attributes, and more absolutes beside. And I cannot see that, thus described, any such conception of God would be happy with the current economic state of the world, such that 1% of people control as much as the remaining 99% put together, and many of our poorer brethren die because they cannot afford adequate food and clean, fresh water. All it would take to achieve the righting of that wrong, it seems to me, is some money, some charity, some love.

Best wishes, 2RM.

Oooo. I actually empathize with you on this one but not about that 99%, 1% stuff. I wouldn't mind throwing in all of my awesome goods if everyone else did the same AND worked according to their abilities. Totally not going to happen though. It really would be nice if we all would pitch in and help care for each other. That way we ALL could be RIIIIICH!!!!   and healthy. I mean the only society I know of that did that was the population of The City of Enoch. Even the saints got wrecked on the principal of consecration and had to downgrade to tithing of 10% . At this time it is only a dream 

Edited May 30, 2018 by Overwatch
*