Fear or Love?

Do you believe in Jesus because you love Him, or because you fear hell? Should children obey their parents because they fear being punished, or because they love them?

This question stems from some negative reviews of Tedd Tripp’s book Shepherding a Child’s Heart.

Originally posted 10/2/2004, on bibleforums.org:

Which is better–obedience out of fear, or obedience out of love? I think we would all agree that obedience out of love is better. From what I’ve seen about this book, Tedd Tripp is saying the same thing. He is focused on the child’s heart moreso than their actions, and the parent’s role in protecting and guiding their child’s heart.

The difference of opinion appears to be in the best way to effectively guide and prepare children so that they will be most likely to acheive that goal of obedience to Christ out of love.

Which is better–obedience out of fear, or disobedience? Some people may disagree with me, but I think obedience always trumps disobedience. Every child I’ve ever seen is disobedient, so something needs to be done to help them move from disobedience to obedience. The big question is whether that is best accomplished by a two-part process (‘obey because there are consequences’ first, followed by ‘obey because you want to’) or a one-part process that skips right to the final goal.

The Old Testament tells us to love God with all our heart, soul, and mind; but it seems to talk even more about fearing God and keeping His commandments. Why did God wait 4,000 years before sending Jesus to redeem us for our sins? Why did He lay down the law to the Israelites and stress judgement for so long, instead of skipping right to grace and love? (not that grace and love are absent from the OT; they just don’t seem to be the focal point like they are in the NT.)

When I was a child, I loved my parents, but that isn’t necessarily why I obeyed them. When I was young, I obeyed them because I would get spanked if I didn’t. As I got older, I continued to obey them (for the most part) even if I knew I wouldn’t get caught, because they had taught me right from wrong and I loved and respected them.

Soldiers in basic training do what they’re told because their commanding officer will make their lives miserable if they don’t. Yet when their training is over, many soldiers would voluntarily lay down their lives for their commander. I doubt if our military would function nearly as well if it wasn’t for some healthy fear of disobeying. Now, soldiers aren’t children, and children should not be treated like soldiers, but I think the principle still applies. I don’t think it’s wrong to instill a little fear, because that is often a necessary motivator. It’s hard to teach someone love and respect if they won’t first obey.

It is wrong to overemphasize fear, or to stop at step 1 of a 2-step process. Some churches and leaders are guilty of this. They get so wrapped up in the negative consequences of disobedience, that they end up failing in their goal of guiding the heart, because outward behaviour gets priority instead. They don’t intentionally put outward behaviour above heart change, but that’s the message that comes across. As with most things in life, the best approach is balance not one or the other. It can be difficult to find the right balance.

More thoughts on “the fear of the Lord…”

Originally posted 10/4/2004 on bibleforums.org:

Some people get hung up on the word fear, because they associate it with terror. It has more to do with reverence and respect for the power and holiness of God. An illustration I like that sheds a little light on a proper context for fear goes something like this: a group of teenagers are hanging out and someone suggests going to do something that they shouldn’t do. One teen objects, and says “no, I’d be scared my dad would find out.” Another teen sneers, “what you’re afraid your daddy will hurt you if he finds out?” The teen replies, “no, I’m afraid if he found out it would hurt him.” This isn’t a perfect illustration, but it gives a picture of “being afraid” in a proper context.

I am reminded of a passage in The Lion, The Witch, and The Wardrobe by C.S. Lewis (if you haven’t read the Chronicles of Narnia, I highly recommend you do).

If you’re familiar with the story, you know that it is an allegory, and Christ is represented by Aslan the lion. Much of the story centers on four children, Peter, Susan, Edmund, and Lucy, and their journeies in Narnia. In the following passage, Mr. & Mrs. Beaver are describing Aslan (Jesus) to them:

“Is he—quite safe?” [asks Susan.] “I shall feel rather nervous about meeting a lion.”

“That you will dearie, and no mistake,” said Mrs. Beaver; “if there’s anyone who can appear before Aslan without their knees knocking, they’re either braver than most or else just silly.”

“Then he isn’t safe?” said Lucy.

“Safe?” said Mr. Beaver; “don’t you hear what Mrs. Beaver tells you? Who said anything about safe? ‘Course he isn’t safe. But he’s good. He’s the King, I tell you.”

There is something a little paradoxical about God being our shield, protector, provider, comforter, etc.; yet at the same time He is our fearsome judge and ruler. Is God safe? No, but He’s good, so you can trust Him. He gives us plenty of reason to fear getting on His bad side, but He also gives us His word that He knows what’s best for us and will take good care of us if we trust and obey Him.

"Once Saved Always Saved"

Eternal Security of the believer, or “once saved, always saved” (OSAS) is a hotly debated topic among some Christians. Is it possible to lose your salvation? One of the tenets of Calvinism is “Perseverance of the saints:” the belief that a true Christian will never completely turn their back on God. This goes hand-in-hand with the debate about predestination vs. free-will. If we chose God, it would make sense that we could change our minds. If God chose us, then He is not likely to let us go.

Originally posted 9/22/04 at bibleforums.org:

Q: Is it necessary to be “right” on the OSAS issue in order to be saved? In other words, can you truly be saved if your understanding of salvation is wrong?

This is not an attempt to determine which side is right, but to put the debate in perspective, and determine how significant of an issue it is.

A: I do not believe it’s necessary to fully understand how salvation works in order to be saved. If I’m drowning and someone offers to pull me out of the water, it’s not that important to me to understand how the rope is constructed and what kind of footing they have; I’m just going to grab onto the rope and let them pull me in. I think staunch OSAS believers and people who are strongly opposed to OSAS can both be saved.

I believe in OSAS. I believe the majority of Biblical evidence supports this doctrine. I think it’s worth exploring the issue because it reveals something about God’s character and how He operates. However, in some sense, I think the whole debate misses the point. The point is not WHEN you got saved, be it the first time you accepted Jesus as Savior or the most recent time you asked for forgiveness; the important thing is that you are following Jesus. Our goal shouldn’t be to cross the starting line; our goal is to cross the finish line, and that requires making steady progress towards the finish line by following Jesus. Some people can’t nail their salvation down to a specific point in time; it may have been a long process that got them started running the race. At some point in time, they “crossed the starting line” and God knows when that was, but it’s not really that important to us. The important thing to us is that we continue to run the race.

Originally posted 12/12/2004 on bibleforums.org:

I believe that once we respond to God’s call, our Good Shepherd keeps us in His flock. I see value in debating eternal security as a study of God’s character, but very little value in the debate over how it affects us. As far as we are concerned, the question of whether we were “really saved in the first place” or need to “get saved again” is not worth discussing. The only question that matters is “are you following Jesus?” If not, you need to start following Him. Whether you turn and walk His way for the 1st time or 50th time is insignificant.

Heaven

What will heaven be like? Will we “start over” with new bodies, new interests, new personalities, etc.?

Orginally posted 8/13/04 at bibleforums.org:

I’m fairly certain that life in heaven is not a “new existence.” We get new bodies, and our imperfections are eliminated, but we’re still the same people with the same spirits. It’s a continuation of our life, so I think to a large extent, our memories, personalities, etc., will survive.

There will be some differences; there is no marriage in heaven, so does that mean your relationship with your (former) wife will be the same as your relationship with your sister or any other woman, or is there still a unique bond? There is no more pain, so does that mean painful memories are wiped out, or just that we may remember the event, but it is no longer painful?

Orginally posted 3/9/2005 on bibleforums.org:

Our “soul” is not “another person inside of us,” it’s simply who we are. Our body is just the package. Our mind is how we think. Our soul encompasses our thoughts and emotions; it’s the “real us.”

When we get to heaven, we will not begin a “second existence.” Heaven will be a continuation of our lives here, except with the imperfections removed. Some conventions from our life on earth will no longer exist, such as marriage and family, but we’ll still be the same people. I think we will retain our memories and our personalities. Bad memories will no longer haunt us, and personality flaws will be gone, but the things that make us “who we are” will remain. We won’t all be converted into clones.