New Teaching: Qualification

Public forum to discuss questions about Mormon history and doctrine.
Posts: 5977
Joined: 07 Oct 2010, 14:16
Location: Pacific Northwest

Re: New Teaching: Qualification

Post by Roy » 18 Apr 2019, 12:50

Curt Sunshine wrote:
18 Apr 2019, 12:11
And then there is the concept that "whom the Lord calls, he qualifies". I see qualifying as becoming able - which fits both eternal progression and grace quite well
"When the Lord calls, he also empowers." I like the sound of that. In relation to my pastor friend's example of the season pass to Disney Land, it fits that Jesus grants us freedom - what we do with that freedom is how we say thank you.

Like the moving concepts from Valjean's Soliloquy:
One word from him and I'd be back
Beneath the lash, upon the rack
Instead he offers me my freedom
I feel my shame inside me like a knife
He told me that I have a soul,
How does he know?
What spirit comes to move my life?
Is there another way to go?
Another story must begin! ... loquy.html
"It is not so much the pain and suffering of life which crushes the individual as it is its meaninglessness and hopelessness." C. A. Elwood

“It is not the function of religion to answer all the questions about God’s moral government of the universe, but to give one courage, through faith, to go on in the face of questions he never finds the answer to in his present status.” TPC: Harold B. Lee 223

"I struggle now with establishing my faith that God may always be there, but may not always need to intervene" Heber13

User avatar
Site Admin
Posts: 3528
Joined: 22 Oct 2008, 16:27

Re: New Teaching: Qualification

Post by hawkgrrrl » 18 Apr 2019, 17:52

I think this concept, particularly the notion of "qualifying for eternal life" (!) demonstrates a lack of understanding of grace and probably not understanding Paul's writings at minimum. (BTW, eternal life is a gift for all who have lived. It's exaltation that's just for the top dogs.)

I did a post about Romans that I think is really helpful to this discussion: ... romans-do/

Romans is the main epistle of Paul's that explains the concept of grace, and it's written to the two differing groups of church-goers: Jewish and Pagan converts. Because the Jewish converts had lived under the law of Moses, they were very works-focused and upset that the newcomers didn't have to make the same sacrifices they did.

In the comments, I shared a story that will perhaps sound familiar to those of you who've been in Gospel Doctrine classes:
One thing I thought was interesting when I taught the lesson is that an older sister raised her hand and said, “It sounds like you’re saying that works aren’t necessary to be saved.” I said, “Yes, that is what Paul is saying.” Several class members audibly said “Faith without works is dead,” quoting James. I clarified, “Yes, James said that. These are two different people; Paul didn’t write James.

Just like there are different members of the Q12 who focus on different things at conference, two different people said those things.” There’s this tendency to harmonize the scriptures, and even general conference talks, as if they all came straight from one source, but they didn’t.

I actually fully expected the class to come back with the BOM scripture from 2 Nephi that we are saved “after all we can do.” Paul essentially disagrees with this view in Romans, unless the word “after” means something else, more like “despite.” Maybe if after means at the end of our life’s labors. Paul’s argument is that boasting of our works is a slippery slope used to justify excusing ourselves when compared to other sinners. This was what Paul was cautioning the Jews against. (Romans 9:3) Of course, Nephi would have still been operating under the Law of Moses, so those could be the works referred to. Paul points out that even if we have the law, we never DO “all we can do.” But that’s one reason Nephi comes off as a bit of a jerk.
I do think DFU really GETS grace in a way none of the other Q15 do, but that's because he was raised Lutheran (or at least in a Lutheran part of Europe).

Posts: 85
Joined: 25 Aug 2018, 18:49

Re: New Teaching: Qualification

Post by Arrakeen » 18 Apr 2019, 21:18

I've always felt that the 2 Nephi scripture was misrepresented. In context, it seems to me to say that they want to persuade others to believe in Christ, since it is through Christ's grace that salvation comes, not through works. I always viewed this as a grace-over-works scripture, but of course found out that others have the exact opposite interpretation. I was even mildly "corrected" in the MTC when I brought up grace into a lesson.

I think for some people, works are simply a natural result of conversion, but play no role in actual salvation. It seems like we more often focus on a model of doing good works as a means to conversion to Christ. The difference between doing good from a heartfelt desire, and developing that heartfelt desire through doing good.

Do we serve others because we love them, or do we develop a love for others by serving them? I think there's an element of both. Perhaps "qualifying" simply means gaining a greater love of God as we do good works. In this case, "salvation" could simply be our relationship with God. Grace could be described as God's love for us. It is freely given, and there is nothing we could ever do to earn it. But our love for God and our appreciation for his love can be cultivated to some extent as we sincerely do good. God is waiting with open arms ready to accept everyone, the only thing missing is our desire to be with him.

But it is all only possible because of grace, since we would never have a chance if God did not already love us unconditionally.
We love him, because he first loved us.

Post Reply