Unconditional Love

[mikbone]

This has become one of my new pet peeves.

In the past few months I have had to make commentaries in Elder’s Quorum and Gospel Doctrine that we don’t believe in this concept.

The word unconditional is not found within the standard works.

We believe in Love.  And we know that Love is one of God’s most powerful attributes.

If God did have unconditional love, there would have been no need for the plan of salvation.  Lucifer would not have fallen.  There would have been no need for hardship. There would have been no need for a Savior.  A monkey in a box with an easy button would have served just as well.  Luckily, that didn’t happen.

The concept of unconditional love, no doubt, was inspired by the adversary.

 

Edited May 22, 2023 by mikbone

[mordorbund]

There is a baseline of love that God shows everyone. The farmer that brutally murders his brother will still receive rain on his crops. If that’s what fellow saints refer to as unconditional love, then God has it. If, instead, they have picked up the popular “God loves you as you are” they should follow it up like Elder Holland did, “don’t plan to stay as you are.” God’s salvific love is predicated on following Him. But his love and hate aren’t based on the petty divisions we often create. “Righteousness is the only protected class for God.”

[mikbone]

12 minutes ago, mordorbund said:

If that’s what fellow saints refer to as unconditional love

Words have meaning.

You may have noticed that free speech is under attack.

It is incumbent upon Saints to understand what is happening.  And how Lucifer’s war is being waged.

 

[Vort]

Elder Nelson weighs in on the topic.

https://www.churchofjesuschrist.org/study/ensign/2003/02/divine-love?lang=eng

[laronius]

I think it's more productive to focus on how God's love is manifest than what we call it. Clearly, no decent parent puts conditions on whether or not to love a child. So to that extent "unconditional love" is an accurate phrase. And it's important that people understand that they cannot sin their way beyond God's love for them.

But, while acknowledging that love, we shouldn't stop there but rather transition into explaining the connection between that love and God's commandments.

[mikbone]

17 minutes ago, laronius said:

 

I think it's more productive to focus on how God's love is manifest than what we call it. Clearly, no decent parent puts conditions on whether or not to love a child. So to that extent "unconditional love" is an accurate phrase.

 

Maybe read President Nelson’s article linked by @Vort above.  

Divine love is the correct term.

Unconditional love is not what we are looking for.

Unconditional love makes monsters and spoiled brats.

We absolutely make conditions, plans, and have expectations, for our children.  They need teaching and direction.

God is trying to mold us into something more.  We should do the same with our stewardships.

We should strive for divine love for our children.  

[zil2]

Some things from the scriptures:

Deuteronomy 1:27 - seems the ancient Israelites had no trouble believing God could hate them:

Quote

And ye murmured in your tents, and said, Because the Lord hated us, he hath brought us forth out of the land of Egypt, to deliver us into the hand of the Amorites, to destroy us.

Same idea in Deuteronomy 9:28.

Psalm 5:5 indicates David believes the Lord hates all workers of iniquity. (Ditto Psalm 11:5.)

Quote

The foolish shall not stand in thy sight: thou hatest all workers of iniquity

Hosea 9:15, if I'm reading it right, Hosea taught that the Lord hated people for their wickedness. Malachi 1:3 - the Lord hated Esau.  Helaman 15:4 - the Lord hated the Lamanites (or so Samuel the Lamanite taught).

It seems that all mention of the Lord hating people(s)¹ (as opposed to behaviors or things), ended when Christ came to earth...  (No mention in the NT, D&C, PofGP, nor later in the BofM.)  Perhaps, per John 3:17 (now is not the time for condemnation), hate is in abeyance until "the great command to reap down the earth" (D&C 38:12).

¹I didn't look for synonyms of "hate" - I remembered a few places where the Lord said he hated people, but I can't remember any places where he said, for example, that he despised or abhorred people, so I didn't go looking for those.

One could argue definitions and translations and interpretations all day long.  In the end, not sure it matters, but am pretty sure that the modern "unconditional love" is dangerous and potentially damning "doctrine".

[laronius]

1 hour ago, mikbone said:

Maybe read President Nelson’s article linked by @Vort above.  

Divine love is the correct term.

Unconditional love is not what we are looking for.

Unconditional love makes monsters and spoiled brats.

We absolutely make conditions, plans, and have expectations, for our children.  They need teaching and direction.

God is trying to mold us into something more.  We should do the same with our stewardships.

We should strive for divine love for our children.  

I did read it. My point is that I think it's counterproductive to argue against terminology because not everyone interprets things the same. I can show talks from other general authorities who have referenced unconditional love.  Likewise, I don't find Divine Love in the scriptures either. Rather, a better tactic is to focus on understanding doctrine, using whatever terminology helps people understand.  If they like the phrase unconditional love, help them to define it in a way that more perfectly teaches the doctrine.

 

[Guest Godless]

I know my opinion probably doesn't mean much, but when I was still in the church I always thought of divine love as being unconditional. That doesn't mean you hand everything to your children on a silver platter. You have to let them make their own mistakes, find their own way, and deal with the consequences of their decisions. It's the hardest part of being a parent, but it's still love. Honestly, even as an atheist I still think LDS doctrine supports this.

Part of the reason I'm an atheist is because I realized that if there is a god and the nature of his love is NOT in line with LDS doctrine of the plan of salvation (some of the details of which are unique to the LDS Church), then his divine love IS conditional. Every other Christian religion preaches hellfire and eternal torment for the fallen. I believe that goes beyond consequence/justice and into the territory of unnecessary cruelty and malice.

 

[JohnsonJones]

4 hours ago, Godless said:

I know my opinion probably doesn't mean much, but when I was still in the church I always thought of divine love as being unconditional. That doesn't mean you hand everything to your children on a silver platter. You have to let them make their own mistakes, find their own way, and deal with the consequences of their decisions. It's the hardest part of being a parent, but it's still love. Honestly, even as an atheist I still think LDS doctrine supports this.

Part of the reason I'm an atheist is because I realized that if there is a god and the nature of his love is NOT in line with LDS doctrine of the plan of salvation (some of the details of which are unique to the LDS Church), then his divine love IS conditional. Every other Christian religion preaches hellfire and eternal torment for the fallen. I believe that goes beyond consequence/justice and into the territory of unnecessary cruelty and malice.

 

I see it somewhat differently.  I feel that the LDS ideas of the plan of salvation is the ONLY one where the Love of our Father is unconditional, as some would put it.

The ONLY WAY to not go to heaven is to directly reject the plan of salvation, and choose to fight against it and join the enemies who wish to destroy it, the Lord, and heaven itself.

Otherwise, you get some sort of degree of glory in the end.

However, the problem lies within our inherent ability to choose.  If given the ultimate power, will it corrupt us?

That's what this life on earth is really about.   What would we choose, what will we choose, if given our free agency.  In accordance with that, could we be trusted to do what is right?

In the end, it comes down to what WE choose, not what the Lord chooses.  He merely has the reward reflected upon what we have already chosen. 

A Parent can have unconditional love for their child, but if the child chooses to live in prison regardless of what the parent may want, would a good parent who loves their child force their child to live with them instead?  If a parent would love for their child to live closer to home (we'll call home...Utah), but their child REALLY wants to live in Georgia instead...would a loving parent force that child to live in Utah or closer to Utah than what the child wants?

Sometimes love requires us to let the child be where they want to be when they have become and adult.  Free Agency allows that child to go where they want to go.

Of course, some of my views may not have the same interpretation as others.  There is much in the gospel that probably can be interpreted in different ways. 

[Guest Godless]

2 hours ago, JohnsonJones said:

I see it somewhat differently.

I think you and I are basically saying the same thing.

[person0]

Considering that love is a principal of action, our Father's infinite love for us moves Him to work to bring to pass our immortality and eternal life.  His love extends such that he will work to ensure that each of His children will be given sufficient opportunity to receive all he has to give, and for those who still fall short, He will ensure that they still end up with more than they otherwise would have had.  Because of the atoning sacrifice of our Savior Jesus Christ, who was prepared and provided for us by our Father, even the Son's of Perdition will receive immortality, and all others will receive an inheritance of joy above that of this earth, which joy will never end.  While such love cannot quite be said to be unconditional, it is most certainly perfect, and because of His grace, is much more than we deserve.

The question is why would he love us and grant us opportunity beyond what we deserve?  His glory and joy are made full as each of His children participates in and partakes of it.  Because of this, it makes sense that he would give His children every possible opportunity to receive what portion of it they can become eligible for, similar to how we often give our children multiple chances to turn from their misdeeds so that both we and they can experience the joy of a particular reward, such as dessert or a particular activity or opportunity.

[mordorbund]

22 hours ago, mikbone said:

Words have meaning.

You may have noticed that free speech is under attack.

It is incumbent upon Saints to understand what is happening.  And how Lucifer’s war is being waged.

 

Yes, words have meaning. What condition did the murderous farmer meet to merit rain on his crops? I would say that’s unconditional. Elder Nelson prefers the term universal, but I would say it’s universal because it is without conditions. If we create a formal love theology around this talk then we can formalize using universal in lieu of unconditional, but in casual conversation and discussions the two are synonyms.

By all means, remind the saints that there’s more to God’s love than just the unconditional but don’t go overboard and deny that it even exists.

[Vort]

15 hours ago, zil2 said:

Some things from the scriptures:

Deuteronomy 1:27 - seems the ancient Israelites had no trouble believing God could hate them:

Same idea in Deuteronomy 9:28.

Psalm 5:5 indicates David believes the Lord hates all workers of iniquity. (Ditto Psalm 11:5.)

Hosea 9:15, if I'm reading it right, Hosea taught that the Lord hated people for their wickedness. Malachi 1:3 - the Lord hated Esau.  Helaman 15:4 - the Lord hated the Lamanites (or so Samuel the Lamanite taught).

It seems that all mention of the Lord hating people(s)¹ (as opposed to behaviors or things), ended when Christ came to earth...  (No mention in the NT, D&C, PofGP, nor later in the BofM.)  Perhaps, per John 3:17 (now is not the time for condemnation), hate is in abeyance until "the great command to reap down the earth" (D&C 38:12).

¹I didn't look for synonyms of "hate" - I remembered a few places where the Lord said he hated people, but I can't remember any places where he said, for example, that he despised or abhorred people, so I didn't go looking for those.

One could argue definitions and translations and interpretations all day long.  In the end, not sure it matters, but am pretty sure that the modern "unconditional love" is dangerous and potentially damning "doctrine".

Helaman 15:4 "But behold my brethren, the Lamanites hath he [the Lord] hated because their deeds have been evil continually, and this because of the iniquity of the tradition of their fathers. But behold, salvation hath come unto them through the preaching of the Nephites; and for this intent hath the Lord prolonged their days."

EDIT: I really should read a post thoroughly before responding to it.

Edited May 23, 2023 by Vort

[Vort]

Why is it somehow harmful to suggest that God loves without condition? It's what we all want, isn't it? So if everyone likes it, why not believe it? Aside from whether or not it's you know, actually true, the only would be because such a belief leads to bad actions. But what in heaven's name could be the bad effect of believing "God loves me unconditionally"?

Because as I look around, I see that the implication that is always, 100% of the time attached to that statement is: "It Doesn't Matter What I Do". Whatever I do, God loves me. And a loving parent will not lead his child to destruction, right? So eat, drink, and be merry! God has created all men, and in the end he will save all men!

The Lord revealed that "eternal damnation" did not necessarily last forever; "eternal" in this sense is an adjective describing the kind or type or intensity of damnation, rather than its duration. So the choice of words clearly matters to God, who uses words for his own purposes and then expects us to get on board with his usage. Thus we have "terrestrial" used almost completely outside its normal literal meaning of "earthly" or even a figurative meaning of "fallen; worldly", instead meaning "a degree of glory less than that of the celestial but greater than that of telestial." And of course, "celestial" does not mean "of the sky" or "in the starry heavens", which is its literal meaning, but "of a glory surpassing all others, completely beyond human ken." (And the apparently made-up word "telestial", which given its contextual meaning we may only guess may have to do with the Greek prefix "tele-", meaning "far away" or "at a distance".)

The point isn't really that "unconditional love" is not a term used in scripture—though if it were, I doubt this conversation would even be taking place. The point is rather that the term "unconditional love" arguably does more harm than good, especially among many in our selfish, childish, painfully immature society where people insist on defecating on holy things and then expect the Holy One to pat them gently on their heads and tell them what funny girls and boys they are.

[mikbone]

Why is Jesus Christ the Only Beloved?

Is it OK for Elohim to love Christ more than you or me?

Is my wife required to love me unconditionally?

What if I start having extramarital affairs, stop providing for the family, waste my money on gambling, drugs and alcohol.  What if I become physically, emotionally, or sexually abusive?

Where do you draw the line?

Edited May 23, 2023 by mikbone

[zil2]

1 hour ago, Vort said:

Helaman 15:4 "But behold my brethren, the Lamanites hath he [the Lord] hated because their deeds have been evil continually, and this because of the iniquity of the tradition of their fathers. But behold, salvation hath come unto them through the preaching of the Nephites; and for this intent hath the Lord prolonged their days."

EDIT: I really should read a post thoroughly before responding to it.

Not sure what may have been there before the edit, but though I didn't say it specifically, the condition for hate is always the same - wickedness.

[Carborendum]

On 5/23/2023 at 11:29 AM, mikbone said:

Why is Jesus Christ the Only Beloved?

Where do we see that in scriptures?  Perhaps you meant "Only Begotten"?

On 5/23/2023 at 11:29 AM, mikbone said:

Is it OK for Elohim to love Christ more than you or me?

I think it would be ok for Him to do anything.

On 5/23/2023 at 11:29 AM, mikbone said:

Is my wife required to love me unconditionally?

"Required"?  What kind of love?

[Carborendum]

I think that we mortals tend to contradict ourselves when we go back and forth with the definition of love as a feeling and an act.  Sometimes they coincide.  Sometimes they don't.

When I discipline my children, I would think it would be an act of love (usually it is).  But from the child's standpoint, it sure seems like I don't love them at that moment.

So, when the Lord does the equivalent of screaming at his child to prevent them from stepping out into the street in the midst of oncoming traffic, we tend to think "Oh, He's being such a tyrant!  How can a loving God behave this way?"

I don't know what definition of "love" is really in our minds when we discuss Divine Love or unconditional love.  But I do believe that the Lord always has our best interest at heart and He wants us to progress as far as we can.  He also feels what we humans may interpret or perceive as anger, hatred, panic...  when we do something that is so evil that it may jeopardize our eternal progression.

That sounds like love to me.

[mikbone]

42 minutes ago, Carborendum said:

When I discipline my children, I would think it would be an act of love (usually it is).  But from the child's standpoint, it sure seems like I don't love them at that moment.

D&C 95: 1 Verily, thus saith the Lord unto you whom I love, and whom I love I also chasten that their sins may be forgiven, for with the chastisement I prepare a way for their deliverance in all things out of temptation, and I have loved you—
2 Wherefore, ye must needs be chastened and stand rebuked before my face;

[Learner]

Reading through the responses maybe we aren't understanding your question @mikbone Where have you seen in your own life that there isn't unconditional, unwavering love from God or from Jesus Christ? Here's a few scriptures on Love. 

"God so loved the world, that he gave his only begotten Son, that whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but have everlasting life.”—John 3:16

From the Guide to the Scriptures under the section titled Love, "The greatest example of God’s love for His children is found in the infinite Atonement of Jesus Christ."

Romans 8:35-39

"35 Who shall separate us from the love of Christ? shall tribulation, or distress, or persecution, or famine, or nakedness, or peril, or sword?

36 As it is written, For thy sake we are killed all the day long; we are accounted as sheep for the slaughter.

37 Nay, in all these things we are more than conquerors through him that loved us.

38 For I am persuaded, that neither death, nor life, nor angels, nor principalities, nor powers, nor things present, nor things to come,

39 Nor height, nor depth, nor any other creature, shall be able to separate us from the love of God, which is in Christ Jesus our Lord."

I see the WHOLE Plan of Salvation as the biggest expression of Love God can offer to anyone. He sent His Son to die for all of us. We're all imperfect children yet He sent a Son who was perfect. We all have the ability to be forgiven of all of our sins. One of the people above mentioned "Unless we go against the plan is the only way we aren't forgiven" even that is forgiven. That statement was on the right track but it left out a small portion of what is needed to not qualify for a Kingdom of Glory. You would need to have a complete surety that God and His work is real and then go against it. Example if God appeared to you and told you the truth of everything you wanted to know about religion and then if you denied it and went against it. Judas betraying Christ can still be forgiven because it was pre-ressurrection and there wasn't a surety at that moment, at least from whats recorded.

 

That's a lot of leeway to be forgiven.^^

Plus God is smart enough not to go around showing Himself to just anyone that are going to deny Him after that and if they do that's part of Agency and part of the plan. 

 

God also shows His perfect Love by allowing temples to function and perform temple work on both sides of the veil and I want to stress that even those who didn't know about the Gospel or chose not to learn about it in this life they still get to have their ordinances performed and they still get to choose after this life.

Here is a quote from the Church's handbook section 28 "Heavenly Father knew that many of His children would not receive these ordinances during their mortal lives. He provided another way for them to receive ordinances and make covenants with Him. In temples, ordinances can be performed by proxy. This means that a living person receives ordinances on behalf of someone who is deceased. In the spirit world, deceased persons can choose to accept or reject ordinances that have been performed for them (see Doctrine and Covenants 138:19, 32–34, 58–59)."

 

God loves everyone but he can only trust a few.

Love and Trust is different. God really does Love everyone. This is where the term "Beloved" comes from when speaking of Christ. "He is the one who fully, thoroughly and completely pleases God" -LDS Living

Christ completely obeyed the Will of the Father. None of us can do that but we are still loved because it was the Will of the Father for an Atonement to be made on our behalf through Christ. That was the whole point of the Plan.

Answer that first question and maybe we can better understand you if this hasn't helped thus far. Here's the question again @mikbone,

 

"Where have you seen in your own life that there isn't unconditional, unwavering love from God or from Jesus Christ?"

[mikbone]

9 hours ago, Learner said:

“Where have you seen in your own life that there isn't unconditional, unwavering love from God or from Jesus Christ?"

https://www.churchofjesuschrist.org/study/ensign/2003/02/divine-love?lang=eng

I can’t explain it better than the above.

[Vort]

10 hours ago, Learner said:

Reading through the responses maybe we aren't understanding your question @mikbone

Have you actually read those responses? @mikbone asked no question, but made a statement that has been discussed in the thread. I think several people have covered the topic from various directions. If you think that Elder Nelson was mistaken and that "unconditional love" truly is a Godly attribute as taught in scripture, you should make your argument after making your assertion.

[Carborendum]

10 hours ago, mikbone said:

https://www.churchofjesuschrist.org/study/ensign/2003/02/divine-love?lang=eng

I can’t explain it better than the above.

Well, you didn't actually answer his question.  But I'll just address the Nelson address since it has now been brought up twice in this thread.

*******************

Here's the problem: Semantics.  If we're trying to argue about whether God's "love" is "unconditional" then we need to define both of those terms.

My previous posts focused on determining what "love" actually means... specifically "Godly love".  And I stand by it.

Now Elder Nelson defines "unconditional" as

Quote

The term unconditional means “without condition or limitation; absolute.”

I'd agree with that definition.  But throughout his entire address, he did not explicitly define "love".  And that is the problem with many in this world.  Nelson even addresses this errant mindset.

Quote

Understanding that divine love and blessings are not truly “unconditional” can defend us against common fallacies such as these: “Since God’s love is unconditional, He will love me regardless …”; or “Since ‘God is love,’ He will love me unconditionally, regardless …”

These arguments are used by anti-Christs to woo people with deception. Nehor, for example, promoted himself by teaching falsehoods: He “testified unto the people that all mankind should be saved at the last day, … for the Lord had created all men, … and, in the end, all men should have eternal life.”

People today tend to think that "love" means granting of eternal life.  And by that definition, yes, it is certainly conditional.  And if that is what people are thinking "Godly love" means, then I'm on board with the doctrine that it is truly conditional.

But then he points to a different concept.

Quote

Divine love is universal. God “maketh his sun to rise on the evil and on the good, and sendeth rain on the just and on the unjust.” Jesus is the light of the world, giving life and law to all things. “He inviteth … all to come unto him … ; and he denieth none that come unto him, black and white, bond and free, male and female.” And all are invited to pray unto our Father in Heaven.

I'm going to try my best not to criticize.  When he describes "love" here, he is no longer talking about granting Eternal Life.  Now he is talking about "invitation to all" to come unto Him.  That is a completely different aspect of "Divine Love."  He didn't clarify that he's talking about a different aspect of love.  But he made it a point to avoid using the term "unconditional" and uses the term "universal."

I would submit that what he calls "universal love" is what most people would call "unconditional love."  Semantics.

In one of the Church videos on the Book of Mormon, a father has a wayward son.

Quote

Son: Father, why can't you just be happy for me?
Father: I am happy for you.  But I am also sad, because I know that your happiness cannot last.

This idea that God will always want us to be happy is what I'm calling "unconditional love."  What I call "unconditional love" is this unwavering desire for good in each of our lives.  And that is something that I hope we all agree upon.  If you don't like "love," substitute "Desire for good."

But it is so sad that people take this unwavering desire for good as a promise of unconditional Eternal Life.  That is what I disagree with.

Edited June 15, 2023 by Carborendum

[mikbone]

43 minutes ago, Carborendum said:

This idea that God will always want us to be happy is what I'm calling "unconditional love."  What I call "unconditional love" is this unwavering desire for good in each of our lives. 

I don’t like to see anyone try to put words into the prophets mouth or interpret / clarify his statement.  His words stand on their own.

https://bycommonconsent.com/2022/03/14/is-divine-love-unconditional-grappling-with-a-20-year-old-lds-doctrinal-conundrum/

The above is a do-gooders attempt to steady the ark.

 

The term ‘unconditional love’ is not found within the scriptures.  But it is found all over social media.  Unfortunately, many people have fixated on the social media interpretation of unconditional love and then have used the term to describe God.

It is a fallacy.  A common tool used by the adversary to pull the wool over the eyes and ears of those who cannot see or hear.  Reminds me of chapter 28 of 2 Nephi.